Wikipedia - User contributions [en]

Someone like You (Adele song)

2015-06-19T23:36:13Z

89.76.8.142: /* Writing and inspiration */

{{pp-move-dispute|small=yes}}
{{Use British English|date=July 2011}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2011}}
{{Infobox single
| Name = Someone like You
| Cover = Adele_-_Someone_Like_You.jpg
| Border = yes
| Artist = [[Adele]]
| from Album = [[21 (Adele album)|21]]
| Released = {{start date|2011|1|24|df=y}}
| Format = {{startflatlist}}
* [[CD single]]
* [[Music download|digital download]]
{{endflatlist}}
| Genre = {{startflatlist}}
* [[Soul music|Soul]]
* [[Pop music|pop]]
{{endflatlist}}
| Recorded = 2010
| Length = 4:47
| Label = [[XL Recordings|XL]]
| Writer = {{startflatlist}}
* [[Adele]]
* [[Dan Wilson (musician)|Dan Wilson]]
{{endflatlist}}
| Producer = {{startflatlist}}
* Adele
* Dan Wilson
{{endflatlist}}
| Chronology =
| Last single = "[[Rolling in the Deep]]" (2010)
| This single = "'''Someone Like You'''" (2011)
| Next single = "[[Set Fire to the Rain]]" (2011)
| Misc = {{External music video|{{YouTube|hLQl3WQQoQ0|"Someone Like You"}}}}
}}

"'''Someone like You'''" is a song by English recording artist [[Adele]]. It was written by Adele and [[Dan Wilson (musician)|Dan Wilson]] for her second studio album ''[[21 (Adele album)|21]]''. The song was inspired by a broken relationship, and lyrically it speaks of Adele coming to terms with it. [[XL Recordings]] released the song as the second single from the album on 24 January 2011 in the United Kingdom and on 9 August 2011 in the United States. Accompanied only by a piano in the song (played by co-writer Wilson), Adele sings about the end of the relationship with her ex-boyfriend. The song received universal critical acclaim from music critics who chose the song as a highlight of the album and praised the lyrics, its simple sound and Adele's vocal performance.

Following a well-received performance of the song at the [[2011 BRIT Awards]], "Someone like You" became Adele's first number one single in the United Kingdom and it stayed on the top of the chart for five weeks. The song also topped the charts in Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, Italy, France and Switzerland, and has become Adele's second number one in the United States. With that achievement Adele became the first female British solo singer in the history of the [[Billboard Hot 100|''Billboard'' Hot 100]] to have two number ones from the same album. In July 2011, it became the first single of the decade to sell a million units in the United Kingdom and it was certified Platinum by the [[British Phonographic Industry]] (BPI), as well as being certified 5× platinum by the [[Recording Industry Association of America]] (RIAA) in the United States.

An accompanying [[music video]] for the song was directed by [[Jake Nava]] and filmed in [[Paris]], [[France]]. The video showed Adele walking alone through the streets with a sad look on her face. Critics praised the video for being simple and perfect for the sound of the song. Adele performed the song on several award and television shows including the 2011 BRIT Awards, [[2011 MTV Video Music Awards]], ''[[Jimmy Kimmel Live!]]'', ''[[The Ellen DeGeneres Show]]'', and the song was played on the [[American Broadcasting Company|ABC]] hit show ''[[Grey's Anatomy]]''. She added the song on the [[set list]] of her second tour [[Adele Live]]. The live performances of the song were heavily praised by music critics and fans. The song was covered by multiple artists and groups, including [[Katy Perry]], [[Taio Cruz]], the cast of the series ''[[Glee (TV series)|Glee]]'', and several other artists.

In a list voted for by the public in conjunction with [[The Official Charts Company]]'s 60th anniversary, "Someone Like You" was voted the third-most favourite single of the last 60 years in the UK, with [[Michael Jackson]]'s "[[Billie Jean]]" voted number two and [[Queen (band)|Queen]]'s "[[Bohemian Rhapsody]]" as number one.<ref>http://www.nme.com/news/queen/64932</ref> "Someone like You" is the 36th-best-selling single in the history of the [[UK Singles Chart]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/the-million-sellers-the-uks-biggest-ever-selling-singles-revealed-1685/|title=The Million Sellers – the UK's biggest ever selling singles revealed!|first=Dan|last=Lane|work=[[The Official Charts Company]]|date=4 November 2012|accessdate=10 November 2012}}</ref> As a critically successful song, "Someone like You" appeared on many year-end lists about the best songs of 2011. "Someone like You" was the first recipient of the [[Grammy Award for Best Pop Solo Performance]], at the [[2012 Grammy Awards|54th Grammy Awards]], held on 12 February 2012. In 2013, it became the most downloaded digital single of all-time in the UK.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2306327/Adele-tops-time-download-chart-UK-buys-BILLION-digital-singles-legally.html | location=London | work=Daily Mail}}</ref>

==Writing and inspiration==
[[File:Dan Wilson.jpg|thumb|[[Dan Wilson (musician)|Dan Wilson]] (''pictured''), an American songwriter and producer co-wrote the song with Adele.<ref name="Booklet" />]]
"Someone Like You" is about a boyfriend who broke up with Adele.
She wrote it with American songwriter and producer [[Dan Wilson (musician)|Dan Wilson]].<ref name="Booklet">{{cite AV media notes |title=21 (Liner Notes)|titlelink=21 (Adele album)|others=Adele|year=2011|chapter= |first=Adele |last=Adkins|authorlink=Adele|coauthors= |type=Compact Disc |publisher=[[Columbia Records]]/[[XL Recordings]] |id=|location=London, England |ref= }}</ref> It was one of the last written for ''21''.<ref name="Booklet" /> The track, which epitomizes the lyrical content of ''21'', summarizes the now defunct relationship that the record is all about.<ref name="Levine">{{cite news|last=Levine|first=Nick|url=http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a300781/adele-someone-like-you-sums-up-my-album.html|title=Adele: 'Someone Like You' sums up my album|publisher=Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi Médias|date=28 January 2011|accessdate=28 February 2011}}</ref> Adele has openly discussed the genesis of it saying, "Well, I wrote that song because I was exhausted from being such a bitch, with '[[Rolling in the Deep]]' or '[[Rumour Has It (Adele song)|Rumour Has It]]' ... I was really emotionally drained from the way I was portraying him, because even though I'm very bitter and regret some parts of it, he's still the most important person that's ever been in my life, and 'Someone Like You,' I had to write it to feel OK with myself and OK with the two years I spent with him. And when I did it, I felt so freed."<ref>{{cite news |last=Montgomery |first=James |title=Adele Says 21 Has People Thinking 'I'm Sort Of A Manic-Depressive' |url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1658345/adele-21.jhtml |publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|date=18 February 2011 |accessdate=23 July 2011}}</ref>

Adele revealed that she was struggling emotionally when she composed it: "When I was writing it I was feeling pretty miserable and pretty lonely, which I guess kind of contradicts 'Rolling in the Deep'. Whereas that was about me saying, 'I'm going to be fine without you', this is me on my knees really."<ref name="Levine"/> She discussed further the inspiration of the song: "I can imagine being about 40 and looking for him again, only to turn up and find that he's settled with a beautiful wife and beautiful kids and he's completely happy... and I'm still on my own. The song's about that and I'm scared at the thought of that."<ref name="Levine"/>

Adele had said that she began writing it on her acoustic guitar in the wake of the break-up of her 18-month relationship with the 30-year-old man she thought she would marry. A few months after their split, he was engaged to someone else. "We were so intense I thought we would get married. But that was something he never wanted... So when I found out he does want that with someone else, it was just the horrible-est feeling ever. But after I wrote it, I felt more at peace. It set me free... I didn't think it would resonate... with the world! I'm never gonna write a song like that again. I think that's the song I'll be known for."<ref name="Peterson1">{{harvnb|Peterson|2011|p=93}}</ref> She also said that "I wrote that song on the end of my bed. I had a cold. I was waiting for my bath to run. I'd found out that he'd got engaged to someone else."<ref name="Peterson2">{{harvnb|Peterson|2011|p=98}}</ref>

==Recording and composition==
{{Listen
| filename = Someone Like You.ogg
| title = "Someone Like You"
| description = A 27-second sample of "Someone like You" which features spare and understated production. In the song, Adele wishes her former lover happiness on his new relationship and begs him to never forget her.
|pos=left }}
Adele later collaborated with famed musician and producer Dan Wilson on completing "Someone Like You" which was one of the final songs composed for the album. Prior to meeting with Wilson, Adele said she wrote some of the lyrics using her acoustic guitar.<ref name="KMTT">Adkins, Adele. [[KHTP|KMTT]]. Personal Interview by Shawn Stewart. December 2010.</ref> The two sat around the piano for two days and brainstormed various melodies and lyrics, and ultimately decided to keep the musical production sparse: "We just wrote it on the piano and then we recorded it when it was written. It wasn't sort of like recording it and listening to it thinking 'where can we go next?' It was really old school."<ref name="KMTT" /> During an interview with ''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'', Wilson stated that while writing the song, they wanted to make it as personal as possible.<ref name="bil1005" /> He added "We didn't try to make it open-ended so it could apply to 'anybody.' We tried to make it as personal as possible. She may not have had a melodic hook or a specific lyrical idea, but she always knew what she wanted to say. She definitely had a master plan."<ref name="bil1005" /> The song was recorded at Harmony Studios in West [[Hollywood, California]] with Wilson playing piano. Philip Allen engineered in the studio.<ref name="Booklet" /> The [[Audio mixing (recorded music)|mixing]] was done by [[Tom Elmhirst]] and [[Dan Parry]] while the [[audio mastering|mastering]] was finished by Tom Coyne.<ref name="Booklet" />
{{quote box|width=30%|align=right|quote="[...] 'Someone Like You,' the stirring, somber closer in which Adele goes to visit a former love (with high hopes of a reconciliation), only to discover he has not only moved on with his life, but is in a much better place. And though she's heartbroken, she puts on a brave face, stubbornly proclaiming she'll find someone just like him, even if she knows that she never will. And that conclusion makes you ache not only because it's so daunting, but because it's so real. We've all felt that way, tried to trick ourselves into thinking that any other outcome was possible. In Adele's music, much like life, there are no happy endings."|source=– James Montgomery of MTV News talking about "Someone Like You".<ref name="mtvpain" />}}
According to sheet music published at Musicnotes.com by [[Sony Music Publishing]], "Someone like You" is a slow tempo of 67 beats per minute.<ref name="musicnotes" /> Written in [[common time]], the song is in the key of [[A major]].<ref name="musicnotes">{{cite web|title=Adele – Someone Like You Sheet Music (Digital Download)|publisher=Musicnotes.com [[Sony Music Publishing]]|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> Adele's vocal range spans from [[F (musical note)|F#3]] to [[E (musical note)|E5]] during the song.<ref name="musicnotes" /> A slow, plaintive ballad pairing Adele's voice with a looping piano line, "Someone like You" is the lyrical opposite of "[[Rolling in the Deep]]"<ref name="Adkins2011locSomeoneLikeYou">{{cite web|last=Adkins|first=Adele|year=2011|title=Adele ''21'' Track by Track Interview|url=http://www.adele.tv/trackbytrack/archive/|publisher=Adele.tv. [[XL Recordings]]|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> on which the singer narrates coming to terms with the end of the relationship:<ref name="Adkins2011locSomeoneLikeYou"/> "Nevermind, I'll find someone like you/I wish nothing but the best for you, too/Don't forget me, I beg/I'll remember you said/Sometimes it lasts in love, but sometimes it hurts instead." According to Sean Fennessey of ''[[The Village Voice]]'', the singer's "nuanced"<ref name="Village" /> voice goes up a full [[octave]] and "into a near-shrieked whisper" as she sings parts of the chorus.<ref name="Village">{{cite news|last=Fennessey|first=Sean|url=http://www.villagevoice.com/2011-02-23/music/adele-goes-deep/|title=Adele Goes Deep: The queen of British white-girl r&b-dom is crowned at last|work=The Village Voice |location=New York |publisher=Village Voice Media|date=23 February 2011 |accessdate=21 September 2011}}</ref> However, she "rebounds and gathers herself", and her voice descends into its fuller and more melancholy state.<ref name="Village" /> Critics praised its introspective lyrics and maturity.<ref name="Dorken" /><ref name="Pitchfork" /> "Someone like You" has been compared to the song "[[Hometown Glory]]" (2008) from the album ''[[19 (Adele album)|19]]''.<ref name="Dorken">{{cite news |last=Dorken |first=Joanne |url=http://www.mtv.co.uk/artists/adele/news/254508-adele-21-track-by-track-review |title=Adele '21' – Track By Track Review | Adele | News | MTV UK |publisher=MTV UK. MTV Networks|date=21 January 2011 |accessdate=20 February 2011}}</ref> John Murphy of [[MusicOMH]] said that the song "casts Adele as the spurned lover, turning up outside her ex's house, now moved on and settled down, begging for a second chance."<ref name="OMH" /> According to Aamir Yaqub of Soul Culture, "Talking of a lost love, this an extremely touching track with a vocal performance that makes the narrative almost tangible ... It really captures the experience of the story and puts it across in both a credible and incredible fashion."<ref name="soulculture1">{{cite web|url=http://www.soulculture.co.uk/reviews/adele-21-album-review/ |title=Adele – 21 | Album Review |publisher=SoulCulture |date=26 January 2011 |accessdate=20 February 2011}}</ref> Camreon Adams of ''[[Herald Sun]]'' called the song a "spine-tingling sparse piano ballad."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ipad/album-of-the-week-adele/story-fn6cc2fg-1225991191372|title=Album of the week: Adele|work=[[Herald Sun]]|publisher=[[The Herald and Weekly Times]]|first=Camreon|last=Adams|date=20 January 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref>

Lyrically, the song talks about the end of Adele's first "real relationship" with her long-time friend and lover and it shows her confronting his marriage.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1658439/adele-21-album-release.jhtml|title=Adele Says Writing 21 'Broke My Heart'|first=James|last=Montgomery|publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|date=22 February 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref><ref name="rollshow" /> At the beginning of the song, she sings the lines "I heard that you're settled down/That you found a girl and you're married now. I heard that your dreams came true/Guess she gave you things I couldn't give to you" with a softly voice and accompanied just by a simple piano melody.<ref name="bil1005">{{cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/473347/adele-the-billboard-cover-story|title=Adele: The Billboard Cover Story
|page=2|first=Mikael|last=Wood|date=28 January 2011|work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]]|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref><ref name="herald">{{Cite news|url=http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110224/entlife/702249860/|title=Adele's second is personal and perfect|work=[[Daily Herald (Arlington Heights)|Daily Herald]]|publisher=Paddock Publications|date=24 February 2011|accessdate=17 September 2011}}</ref> The lyrics of "Someone like You" are talking about what once was and what could have been as stated by a writer of ''[[Daily Herald (Arlington Heights)|Daily Herald]]''.<ref name="herald" /> Finding the strength to bounce back from hardship and heartache, Adele sings the lines, "Never mind, I'll find someone like you. I wish nothing but the best for you, too/Don't forget me, I beg, I remember you said/Sometimes it lasts in love but sometimes it hurts instead."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Soul+sisters+separated+destiny/5216490/story.html#ixzz1ZKYqBrDJ|title=Soul sisters, separated by destiny|work=[[The Vancouver Sun]]|publisher=Postmedia Network Inc.|date=6 August 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011|first=Francois|last=Marchand}}</ref> Talking about the meaning and the composition of the song, Jer Fairall of [[PopMatters]] said: "The song's subject—Adele mentally addressing an old lover who has since found happiness elsewhere—is familiar, but the detail she colors it with are vibrantly tactile and resonant, from the sense-memory setting of 'we were born and raised in a summer haze' to her recollection of his cruel kiss-off line 'I remember you said, 'sometimes it lasts in love and sometimes it hurts instead'{{'}} and how she comes to take solace in the statement as an empowering mantra."<ref name="popmatters" />

==Critical reception==
The song has received universal critical acclaim from a wide variety of publications upon release, and has been viewed as a highlight of ''[[21 (Adele album)|21]]''. In a track-by-track review for ''21'', Joanne Dorken of MTV UK noted the track's placement at the end of the album saying, "It maybe a cliché, but Adele has saved the best until last with this heartfelt and enchanting piano ballad. ... It's sad but beautiful and displays Adele at her best – marking the perfect end to what has been in our eyes, a faultless album."<ref name="Dorken"/> Will Dean of ''[[The Guardian]]'' claimed the song was the album's "highlight", characterizing it as "gorgeous".<ref>{{cite news|last=Dean|first=Will|title=Adele: 21- review|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jan/20/adele-21-review|work=[[The Guardian]]|date=20 January 2011|publisher=[[Guardian Media Group]]|accessdate=6 March 2011|location=London}}</ref> That was somehow echoed by [[Slant Magazine|''Slant'' Magazine]]{{'}}s Matthew Cole who also called the song "gorgeous".<ref>{{cite web|last=Cole|first=Matthew|title=Adele: 21 – Music Review|url=http://www.slantmagazine.com/music/review/adele-21/2403|publisher=[[Slant Magazine|''Slant'' Magazine]]|date=20 February 2011|accessdate=6 March 2011}}</ref> ''[[NME]]''{{'}}s Parkin Chris also marked the song as a highlight, describing it as "surprisingly weighty" and comparing it favorably to the work of American [[Country blues]] singer [[Karen Dalton (entertainer)|Karen Dalton]].<ref>{{cite web|last=Parkin|first=Chris|title=Album Review: Adele – 21 (XL)|url=http://www.nme.com/reviews/adele/11814|work=[[NME]]|publisher=[[IPC Media]]|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=6 March 2011}}</ref>

Tom Breihan of [[Pitchfork Media]] selected "Someone like You" as a song of the day, claiming it served as a reaffirmation of popular music: "Sometimes, pop music can still break your heart."<ref name="Pitchfork">{{cite web|last=Breihan|first=Tom|title=Adele: Someone Like You|url=http://pitchfork.com/reviews/tracks/12105-someone-like-you/|date=15 February 2011|publisher=[[Pitchfork Media]]|accessdate=6 March 2011}}</ref> Writing for [[BBC Online]], Ian Wade noted that the "final track Someone Like You, just voice and piano, is an actual thing of beauty, placing the listener in one of those moments where you feel you're in the presence of a future standard."<ref>{{cite web|last=Wade|first=Ian|date=17 January 2011|title=Review of Adele – 21|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/reviews/fnj9|publisher=[[BBC Online]]. [[BBC]]|accessdate=6 March 2011}}</ref> Bill Lamb of [[About.com]] wrote that "the piano melody is gorgeous and combined with Adele's heartfelt reading of her words, the effect is highly emotional. You can imagine it being both honked through by talent show contestants and transcended by veterans alike."<ref name="about">{{cite news|last=Lamb|first=Bill|title=Review: Adele – "Someone Like You"|url=http://top40.about.com/od/adele/gr/Adele-Someone-Like-You.htm|accessdate=3 September 2011|publisher=[[About.com]]. [[The New York Times Company]]|date=2 September 2011}}</ref> Lamb went to write that the song is one of the "top songs of 2011" and that "romantic pain has rarely been so utterly beautiful."<ref name="about"/> Jer Fairall of PopMatters called the song an "absolute magic" and praised Adele's performance by saying, "Though it is unquestionably her finest vocal showcase to date, it is less remarkable for its more powerful moments than for the small ones where her voice dips, with rueful melancholy on the line 'I heard that your dreams came true' or cracks on the 'I beg' in the chorus, like she's startled at the revelation of her own vulnerability."<ref name="popmatters">{{Cite news|url=http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/137326-adele-21|title=Adele: 21|publisher=[[PopMatters]]|first=Jer|last=Fairall|date=23 February 2011|accessdate=28 September 2011}}</ref> He further called her vocal performance of the song "stunning" and "finally worthy of her talents".<ref name="popmatters" />

Writing for the website No Ripcord, Gary McGinley said that the song "has an aching beauty and the hallmarks of a modern standard."<ref name= "ripcord">{{Cite news|url=http://www.noripcord.com/reviews/music/adele/21|title=Adele ''21''|publisher=No Ripcord|first=Gary|last=McGinley|date=25 January 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> He further added that it "sounds poised to soundtrack atmospheric TV trailers over the coming months."<ref name= "ripcord" /> A writer of [[URB (magazine)|''URB'' magazine]] called "Someone like You" "a heart-wrencher made all the more real by reeling phrasing and bare-voiced pleading, 'I wish nothing but the best for you, too.'"<ref name= "urb">{{Cite news|url=http://www.urb.com/2011/02/25/adele-21/|title=Adele: ''21''| work=[[URB (magazine)|URB]]|date= 25 February 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> John Murphy of MusicOMH categorized "Someone like You" and "[[Turning Tables]]" as "the two best songs on the album."<ref name="OMH">{{cite web|url=http://www.musicomh.com/albums/adele-2_0111.htm |title= Adele: ''21'' Review|last1=Murphy |first1= John |date= 24 January 2011 |publisher=[[MusicOMH]]|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> He concluded that the song was "desperately sad and utterly, utterly gorgeous."<ref name="OMH" /> Bary Walters of ''[[Spin (magazine)|Spin]]'' wrote that on "the piano-led finale, she vows, 'I'll find someone like you,' as if that's progress. It's a statement that's utterly WTF and yet true to the cyclical nature of psychological damage."<ref name="Spin">{{cite web|url=http://www.spin.com/reviews/adele-21-xlcolumbia|title=Adele, ''21'' (XL/Columbia)|publisher=Spin Media LLC| work=[[Spin magazine|Spin]]|author=Walters, Barry|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> [[Sputnikmusic]]{{'}}s Joseph Viney called the song "an ode to stalking with a perverse attitude that lies underneath the fragile composition, looks set to become the soundtrack to a million messy break-ups."<ref name="Sputnik">{{Cite news|url=http://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/41520/Adele-21/|title=Album review: Adele – 21|publisher=[[Sputnikmusic]]|first=Joseph|last=Viney|date=29 January 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> Allison Stewart of ''[[The Washington Post]]'' put the song on her list "Recommended tracks".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/21/AR2011022103780.html|title=Adele's '21' album: Sophomore disc designed to transcend trends|first=Allison|last=Stewart|date=21 February 2011|work=[[The Washington Post]]|publisher=[[The Washington Post Company]]|accessdate=17 September 2011}}</ref>

At the 2011 [[Q Awards]], "Someone like You" was nominated in the category for Best Track.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/music/2011/09/15/adele-and-jessie-j-lead-q-awards-nominations-115875-23421614/|title=Adele and Jessie J lead Q Awards nominations|work=[[Daily Mirror]]|publisher=[[Trinity Mirror]]|date=15 September 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> The song was also nominated in the category for Best Song at the 2011 [[Music of Black Origin Awards]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a338093/mobo-awards-nominations-in-full.html|title=MOBO Awards: Nominations in full|first=Tom|last=Eames|date=31 August 2011|publisher=Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi Médias|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> "Someone like You" won the first [[Grammy Award for Best Pop Solo Performance]], at the [[2012 Grammy Awards|54th Grammy Awards]], which were held on 12 February 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1675194/grammy-nominations-2012-kanye-west-adele-bruno-mars.jhtml |title=2012 Grammy Nominations: Kanye West Tops The List|publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|first=Kelley|last=L. Carter|date=1 December 2011|accessdate=1 December 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.grammy.com/nominees?year=2011&genre=All |title=54th Annual Grammy Awards |publisher=[[Grammy.com]]. [[National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences]] |accessdate=1 December 2011}}</ref> ''[[The Village Voice]]''{{'}}s [[Pazz & Jop]] annual critics' poll ranked "Someone Like You" at number nine to find the best music of 2011; Adele's previous single "Rolling in the Deep" topped the same critics' poll.

==Chart performance==
"Someone like You" achieved international commercial success, topping the [[record chart]]s in Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as reaching the top ten in many other countries. The song debuted at number 36 on the [[UK Singles Chart]] in late-January 2011 due to strong digital downloads from ''21''. Following a live performance of the song at the [[2011 BRIT Awards]], it climbed 46 places from the previous week to number one, beating [[Lady Gaga]]'s single "[[Born This Way (song)|Born This Way]]" (2011), although it was at number 18 on the mid-week chart update.<ref name="achievement">{{cite web|url=http://www.theofficialcharts.com/chart-news/adele-equals-beatles-record-to-lead-official-charts-brits-bonanza/|title=Adele equals Beatles' record to lead Official Charts Brits Bonanza|publisher=The Official Charts Company|date=20 February 2011|accessdate=28 February 2011}}</ref> While "Someone Like You" was at number one on the chart, Adele's previous single, "Rolling in the Deep" was placed at number four.<ref name="achievement" /> With that achievement, Adele has become the first living artist since [[The Beatles]] in 1964 who simultaneously had two top five hits in both the charts (''21'' and ''19'' were also in the top five on the [[UK Albums Chart]]).<ref name="achievement" /><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mtv.co.uk/news/adele/259080-adele-number-1-single-album-someone-like-you-brits|title=Adele's 'Someone Like You' Tops UK Singles Chart|date=21 February 2011|publisher=[[MTV UK]]. [[MTV Networks]]|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref><ref name="hot100peak2" /> It stayed atop the chart for four consecutive weeks (selling upwards of 100,000 copies for three of them{{citation needed|date=September 2011}}) before slipping to number two on 20 March.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chartstats.com/release.php?release=49897|title=Chart Stats – Adele – Someone Like You|publisher=Chart Stats. The Official Charts Company|accessdate=28 September 2011|archiveurl=http://archive.is/UQh7|archivedate=22 July 2012}}</ref> Following a performance on [[Comic Relief]],<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12881151|title=How has Adele become so successful?|publisher=[[BBC Online]]. [[BBC]]|date=28 March 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1367832/Comic-Relief-2011-James-Corden-George-Michaels-Red-Nose-Day-Smithy-sketch.html|title=Best Comic Relief sketch ever? James Corden, George Michael, Justin Bieber and Gordon Brown with JLS is Red Nose Day highlight|work=Daily Mail|publisher=Associated Newspapers Ltd|first=Jody|last=Thompson|date=19 March 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011|location=London}}</ref> "Someone Like You" returned to the number one spot on 27 March, hence becoming the first song to spend 5 weeks at the top of the [[UK Singles Chart]] since [[Katy Perry]]'s "[[I Kissed a Girl]]" (2008).{{citation needed|date=September 2011}} It has been certified Platinum by the [[British Phonographic Industry|BPI]], denoting shipments of 600,000 copies.<ref name="BPI">{{cite web|url=http://www.bpi.co.uk/certifiedawards/Search.aspx|title=Certified Awards Search|publisher=[[British Phonographic Industry]]|accessdate=31 March 2011}}</ref> It became the biggest selling single of 2011 in the United Kingdom selling over 1,000,000 copies as of 5 July 2011 and becoming the first single of the decade to do so.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://uk.news.yahoo.com/adele-single-tops-million-sales-162535308.html|title=Adele single tops a million sales|publisher=[[Yahoo!]]|date=5 July 2011|accessdate=5 July 2011}}</ref> The song also became the 16th song which sold more than 1,000,000 copies from the 2000s.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a328418/adeles-someone-like-you-becomes-first-single-of-decade-to-sell-1m-copies.html|title=Adele's 'Someone Like You' becomes first single of decade to sell 1m copies|publisher=Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi Médias|first=Kristy|last=Kelly|date=5 July 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> It is the third million seller by a UK female solo artist and the first by a UK female singer-songwriter.{{citation needed|date=September 2011}} As of May 2012, current UK sales stand at 1,360,000 copies, making it the best-selling single of 2011 and the second-best-selling of the 21st century.<ref name="musicweek">{{cite journal|url=http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1049481|title=Will Young's Evergreen named best-selling single of the 21st century|last=Rhian|first=Jones|publisher=[[Music Week]]|date=8 May 2012|accessdate=28 June 2012}}</ref><ref name="guardian nov2012">{{cite news|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/nov/04/uk-million-selling-singles-full-list |title=UK's million-selling singles: the full list|author=Ami Sedghi|publisher=[[The Guardian]]|date=4 November 2012|accessdate=4 November 2012|location=London}}</ref> In [[The Official Finnish Charts|Finland]], "Someone like You" debuted at number 14 in October 2011 and rose to number one in its 12th week in early 2012—the week when Adele had three simultaneous top-ten songs ("[[Rolling in the Deep]]" at number two and "[[Set Fire to the Rain]]" at number seven).<ref name="finnish-chart-procession">{{Cite web|url=http://www.ifpi.fi/tilastot/virallinen-lista/artistit/adele/someone+like+you|title=Adele: Someone Like You|publisher=[[Musiikkituottajat – IFPI Finland]]|language=Finnish|accessdate=2011-01-16}}</ref><ref name="finnish-chart-2/2012">{{Cite web|url=http://www.ifpi.fi/tilastot/virallinen-lista/singlet/2012/2|title=Suomen virallinen lista - Singlet 2/2012|publisher=Musiikkituottajat – IFPI Finland|language=Finnish|accessdate=2011-01-16}}</ref> In France, despite not having been certified, "Someone like You" has sold 350,800 copies and became one of the best-selling singles in the country.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://infodisc.fr/Ventes_Sing_10Ans.php?debut=100|title=les Meilleurs Ventes de Singles & Titres depuis 2000|publisher=Infodisc|language=French|accessdate=20 January 2015}}</ref>

The song debuted at number 47 on the [[ARIA Charts|Australian Singles Chart]].<ref name="aus" /> "Someone like You" remained at the top position of the chart for seven consecutive weeks<ref name="aus" /> and it was certified 4× Platinum by the [[Australian Recording Industry Association]] (ARIA).<ref name="auscert">{{cite web|url=http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display.asp?chart=1U50|title=ARIA Charts – Week Commencing 17 October 2011|publisher=[[Australian Recording Industry Association]]|accessdate=12 June 2011}}</ref> It has also peaked at number one in New Zealand for five weeks, ending an 11-week run at number one for "[[Party Rock Anthem]]".<ref name="nz" /> The single sold 51,000 copies its first week in the US, debuting at number 65.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/week-music-sales-adeles-21-163385|title=The Week in Music Sales: Adele's '21' Sells Over 350K|publisher=[[Hollywood Reporter]]|date=2 March 2011|accessdate=3 March 2011|first1=Keith|last1=Caufield}}</ref> The single re-entered the [[Billboard Hot 100|''Billboard'' Hot 100]] at number 97 on the week ending 30 July 2011.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/469163/lmfao-still-atop-hot-100-demi-lovato-debuts-in-top-10|title=LMFAO Still Atop Hot 100, Demi Lovato Debuts In Top 10|first=Gary|last=Trust|location=New York|work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]]|date=21 July 2011|accessdate=23 July 2011}}</ref> Upon its radio release in the United States, and a surge in popularity following her performance at the [[2011 MTV Video Music Awards]], "Someone Like You" climbed 18 positions to number one from number 19, and became her second consecutive number-one single on the Hot 100 and making Adele the first ever British female singer to spawn two consecutive number one singles from the same album.<ref name="hot100peak">{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/467566/adeles-someone-like-you-soars-to-no-1-on-hot-100|first=Gary|last=Trust|date=7 September 2011|title=Adele's 'Someone Like You' Soars To No. 1 On Hot 100|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|accessdate=10 September 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1670009/beyonce-adele-lil-wayne-vma-itunes.jhtml|title=Beyonce, Adele, Lil Wayne Get VMA Bump On iTunes|publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|date=1 September 2011|first=Gil|last=Kaufman|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> After the performance, "Someone Like You" moved from number 11 to number one on the Digital Songs chart with 275,000 downloads sold (191% increase), according to [[Nielsen SoundScan]].<ref name="hot100peak2">{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/467527/adele-makes-billboard-hot-100-history-with-someone-like-you|title=Adele Makes Billboard Hot 100 History With 'Someone Like You'|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|first=Keith|last=Caulfield|date=9 September 2011|location=Los Angeles|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref><ref name="hot100peak" /> On Radio Songs, the track moved from number 42 to number 19 with 46 million all-format audience impressions (59% increase), according to [[Nielsen BDS]].<ref name="hot100peak" /> The song made Hot 100 history by achieving the biggest jump to number 1 in the chart's 53-year history that was not spurred by the release of a single.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/467527/adele-makes-billboard-hot-100-history-with-someone-like-you|title=Adele Makes Billboard Hot 100 History With 'Someone Like You'|publisher=Keith Caulfield, [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date=9 September 2011|accessdate=9 September 2011}}</ref> "Someone Like You" became the first strictly voice-and-piano ballad to top the [[Billboard Hot 100|''Billboard'' Hot 100]].<ref name="pianoballad">{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/467487/is-adeles-someone-like-you-the-first-no-1-piano-and-vocal-only|title=Is Adele's 'Someone Like You' The First No. 1 Piano-And-Vocal-Only Ballad?|date=13 September 2011|accessdate=13 September 2011}}</ref> The song also became the first "unquestionably slow song" to top the Hot 100 chart since [[Rihanna]]'s song, "[[Take a Bow (Rihanna song)|Take a Bow]]" (2008).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/467536/adele-brings-a-ballad-back-to-the-hot-100-summit|title=Adele Brings A Ballad Back To The Hot 100 Summit|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|date=9 September 2011|first=Gary|last=Trust|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> It topped the chart for 1 week and then slipped from number 1 to number 2 being replaced by [[Maroon 5]] and [[Christina Aguilera]]{{'}}s "[[Moves Like Jagger]]".<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/467458/kelly-clarksons-know-it-all-debuts-on-hot-100-rihannas-cheers-rises|work=Billboard|title=Kelly Clarkson's 'Know It All' Debuts on Hot 100, Rihanna's 'Cheers' Rises|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|first=Gary|last=Trust|date=14 September 2011|accessdate=18 October 2011}}</ref> A few days after the release of its video, on 6 October 2011, the song returned to number one and spent more 4 weeks at the top,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/466754/adele-reclaims-hot-100-throne-bob-blasts-into-top-10|title=Adele Reclaims Hot 100 Throne, B.o.B Blasts Into Top 10|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|first=Gary|last=Trust|location=New York|date=5 October 2011|accessdate=6 October 2011}}</ref> where it was soon replaced by "[[We Found Love]]" by [[Rihanna]] featuring [[Calvin Harris]]. With "[[Rolling in the Deep]]" spending 7 weeks at number one on the Hot 100 and "Someone Like You" spending 5 weeks, Adele is the first female solo artist to log 12 weeks at #1 in a calendar year with two strictly solo recordings. [[Beyoncé]], [[Monica (singer)|Monica]] and [[Mariah Carey]] also did it (in 2003, 1998 and 1995, respectively), if collaborations are included.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/74427/week-ending-oct-23-2011-songs-christmas-in-october/;_ylt=Auw7fIMo6S7qDcr63iQOEIIPwiUv|title=Week Ending Oct. 23, 2011. Songs: Christmas In October|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|first=Grein|last=Paul|location=New York|date=26 October 2011|accessdate=1 November 2011}}</ref> As of June 2013, it has sold 5,576,000 downloads in the United States alone.<ref name="yahoojuly2012">{{cite web|url=http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/week-ending-june-2-2013-songs-robin-thicke-205050634.html|title=Week Ending June 2, 2013. Songs: Robin Thicke & Mom|publisher=Chart Watch. Yahoo! Music|last=Grein|first=Paul|accessdate=June 6, 2013}}</ref>

==Music video==
[[File:Someone like you music video screenshot.jpg|left|220px|thumb|Adele walking alone in [[Paris]] in the black-and-white music video for "Someone like You"]]
The [[music video]] for the song was filmed in [[Paris, France]], by English director [[Jake Nava]]<ref name="videopremiere" /> who said:<ref name="videopremiere" /><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.mtv.co.uk/news/adele/333609-adele-someone-like-you-video-teaser|title=Adele Teases 'Someone Like You' Video|publisher=MTV UK. MTV Networks|date=28 September 2011|accessdate=28 September 2011}}</ref>

{{quote|The location evokes style and romance. And shooting early in the morning allows you to focus on Adele in this lonely and emotional space.}}

The video begins with a shot of a road in Paris and Adele is seen walking on it alone. She continues to walk and starts singing the song with a sad look as the camera makes circles and shots more locations in Paris including the [[Eiffel Tower]]. During the second chorus, Adele stops singing and pauses on the [[Pont Alexandre III]] to look over the [[Seine]]. She continues walking through the deserted streets during the [[bridge (music)|bridge]] before finally entering a building in which she sees her ex-lover.<ref name="ewvideo" /> After seeing her, he starts to walk away and several shots of Adele looking at him follow.

The video premiered on [[MTV]] and [[Vevo]] on 29 September 2011.<ref name="mtvpain">{{Cite news|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1671762/adeles-someone-like-video-queen-pain.jhtml|title=Adele's 'Someone Like You' Video: Queen Of Pain|publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|first=James|last=Montgomery|date=29 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref><ref name="videopremiere" /><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/467232/billboard-bits-black-keys-nix-blakroc-2-adeles-someone-video-coming-thursday|title=Billboard Bits: Black Keys Nix 'Blakroc 2,' Adele's 'Someone' Video Coming Thursday|work=Billboard|publisher=Promehteus Global Media|date=27 September 2011|accessdate=28 September 2011|first1=RJ|last1=Cubarrubia|first2=Maria|last2=Sherman}}</ref>

===Reception===

James Montgomery of MTV News called the video "a somber, black-and-white affair, featuring Adele wandering the early morning streets and pining for her long-lost love. It's a perfect match for the song's jaw-dropping emotional range—raw and unfiltered and incredibly sad but also, in a lot of ways, beautiful and resolute."<ref name="videopremiere">{{Cite news|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1671592/adele-someone-like-you-video.jhtml|title=Adele's 'Someone Like You' Video: Watch A Preview!|publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|first=James|last=Montgomery|date=27 September 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> In another review of the video he praised its black-and-white shots saying that "director Jake Nava made the smart decision to shoot it in arty, smudgy black-and-white, which only adds to the clip's desolate, haunted feel."<ref name="mtvpain" /> He added that "there are no special effects, no camera tricks or elaborate choreography, because those are quick fixes" and called Adele the "Queen of Pain."<ref name="mtvpain" /> A writer of the website [[HitFix]] concluded that the video is "in keeping with the singer's subdued style" and added that its vibe fits with the "melancholy tune."<ref name="hitfix">{{Cite news|url=http://www.hitfix.com/articles/preview-released-for-adeles-someone-like-you-music-video|title=30-second preview hits the web for Adele's 'Someone Like You' music video|publisher=[[HitFix]]|date=27 September 2011|accessdate=28 September 2011|author=HitFix Staff}}</ref> ''[[Entertainment Weekly]]''{{'}}s Tanner Stransky called the video "quiet" and said that "it's just what you'd want to see for this break-up heart-wrencher."<ref name="ewvideo">{{cite news|url=http://music-mix.ew.com/2011/09/29/adele-someone-like-you-music-video/|title=Adele releases heartbreaking, beautiful 'Someone Like You' music video: Watch it here|work=[[Entertainment Weekly]]|publisher=Time Inc.|date=29 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011|first=Tanner|last=Stransky}}</ref> Krista Wick of ''[[Entertainment Tonight]]'' praised the video for being "more than enough to accompany Adele's soulful vocals."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.etonline.com/music/114768_Watch_Adele_s_Someone_Like_You_Music_Video/|title=Watch: Adele's 'Someone Like You'|publisher=Etonline.com. ''[[Entertainment Tonight]]''|first=Krista|last=Wick|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref>

Amanda Dobbins of [[New York (magazine)|''New York'' magazine]] concluded that "the secretly devastating video" for "Someone Like You" will remind Adele's ex-lover what he has done by leaving her.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/09/adele_someone_like_you_video_1.html|title='Someone Like You' Video: Adele Takes a Sad Trip to Paris|work=[[New York (magazine)|New York]]|publisher=New York Media, LLC|first=Amanda|last=Dobbins|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> A writer of ''[[The Huffington Post]]'' praised the simplicity and the sadness in the video.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/30/adeles-someone-like-you-video_n_988548.html|title=Adele's 'Someone Like You' Video: Paris, In Black And White (WATCH)|work=[[The Huffington Post]]|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011|first=Jordan|last=Zakarin}}</ref> Sarah Dean of the same publication called it an "uncomplicated, moving film" and wrote, "the video is nothing more than Adele wandering around the deserted city of love alone, under its grey skies, singing her sorrowful notes, but because it's her, we don't need any more."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/09/30/adele-releases-someone-li_n_988461.html|title=Adele Finally Releases A Video For Her Hit Song 'Someone Like You'|work=The Huffington Post|first=Sarah|last=Dean|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> That was somehow echoed by Jason Lipshutz of [[Billboard (magazine)|''Billboard'' magazine]] who said that the video was "simply constructed as the song's vocal-and-piano arrangement."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/viral-videos/467147/adele-wanders-paris-in-someone-like-you-video|title=Adele Wanders Paris in 'Someone Like You' Video|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|location=New York|first=Jason|last=Lipshutz|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Marc Hogan of ''Spin'' said that the scene in which Adele looks in the camera, "speak[s] for itself" about the sadness in the video.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.spin.com/articles/adele-roams-paris-broken-hearted-bw-clip|title=Adele Roams Paris in Broken-Hearted B&W Clip|work=Spin|publisher=Spin Media LLC|date=30 September 2011|first=Marc|last=Hogan|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Andrew Matson of ''[[The Seattle Times]]'' said, "the song of the year now has a simple, perfect video: Adele in Paris, singing and strolling, apparently processing the breakup detailed in the song's lyrics. The look on her face during the 'I wish nothing but the best for you' line is the best, just gutting, a real achievement how she plays it cold but not sarcastic. I think in times of emotional devastation, everyone wants stand on a bridge over the Seine on a cold day, squinting into the wind, sorting it out."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/matsononmusic/2016367007_video_someone_like_you_by_adel.html|title=Video: "Someone Like You" by Adele|work=[[The Seattle Times]]|publisher=[[The Seattle Times Company]]|first=Andrew|last=Matson|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref>

A writer of ''[[Rolling Stone]]'' wrote: "this clip for the ballad 'Someone Like You' sticks to the singer's simple but emotionally direct approach with black-and-white footage that lingers on her subtly expressive face as she lip-synchs to the tune while walking along sad, grey city streets."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.rollingstone.com/videos/new-and-hot/adele-someone-like-you-20110930|title=Video: 'Someone Like You'|work=Rolling Stone|publisher=Wenner Media|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Andrea Devaro of ''[[Long Island Press]]'' concluded, "its simplicity beautifully portrays the complexity of emotions invoked in the song."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.longislandpress.com/2011/09/30/someone-like-you-video-adele-someone-like-you-video-released-video/|title='Someone Like You' Video: Adele 'Someone Like You' Video Released [Video]|work=[[Long Island Press]]|publisher=Morey Publishing|first=Andrea|last=Devaro|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Leah Collins of ''[[Dose (magazine)|Dose]]'' called Adele "'60s bombshell glam" and said that the video's "simplicity is its strength."<ref name="collinsdose">{{cite news|url=http://www.dose.ca/music/Watch+Adele+Take+Very+Pretty+Walk+Shame+Someone+Like+Video/5483085/story.html?cid=dose_nav_drop|title=Watch Adele Take A Very Pretty Walk of Shame in New 'Someone Like You' Video|work=[[Dose (magazine)|Dose]]|publisher=[[Postmedia Network]]|first=Leah|last=Collins|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> She added: "There's something about streetlamps, cafes and the River Seine that lend an air of melancholic elegance to what would otherwise be just another walk of shame by a girl with two-day-old hair. Not everyone gets to indulge in moments as tragic but beautiful as a weepy solitary walk through Paris landmarks. But then, we don't all have voices as tragic and beautiful as Adele's either."<ref name="collinsdose" /> A more mixed review was given by [[AOL]]{{'}}s Ashley Percival who called the video predictable and added "It's all very pleasant, but after all this time, what's the point?".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2011/09/30/adele-someone-like-you-video/|title=Hang on Adele, didn't you release Someone Like You like a zillion years ago?|publisher=[[AOL]]|first=Ashley|last=Percival|date=30 September 2011|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Nicole Eggenberger of ''[[OK!]]'' wrote that Adele "created the perfect music video to go along with her hauntingly beautiful ballad" and further described it as "simple yet stunning."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.okmagazine.com/2011/09/adele-releases-beautiful-new-someone-like-you-music-video/|title=Adele Releases Beautiful New "Someone Like You" Music Video|work=OK!|publisher=Northern & Shell|date=30 September 2011|first=Nicole|last=Eggenberger|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref>

==Live performances==
[[File:Adele someone like you - cropped-2.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Adele performing "Someone like You" in 2011 during a concert in [[Seattle]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]].]]
Adele performed "Someone like You" for the first time in November 2010 on the BBC music show. Later... with Jools Holland before the release of the album.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://idolator.com/5693431/adele-someone-like-you-jools-holland|title=Adele Gives An Emotional Performance Of New Song "Someone Like You"|publisher=[[Idolator (website)|Idolator]]. [[Buzz Media]]|first=Robbie|last=Daw|date=18 November 2010}}</ref> Later, she performed the song at the [[2011 BRIT Awards]] held at [[The O2 Arena (London)|The O2 Arena]] in [[London]] on 15 February 2011.<ref name="mirrorbrits">{{Cite news|url=http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2011/02/16/adele-s-brit-awards-performance-of-someone-like-you-watch-her-breathtaking-performance-again-115875-22927738/|title=Adele and Jessie J lead Q Awards nominations|work=Daily Mirror|publisher=Trinity Mirror|date=16 February 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> She appeared on stage backed just by her pianist while "special effects were limited to a shower of glitter and Adele's own tears, as she almost broke down delivering her lovelorn plea to an ex-boyfriend" as stated by Neil McCormick of ''The Daily Telegraph''.<ref name="mccormick" /> Speaking on the [[ITV2]] after show, Adele explained why she had cried at the end of the performance saying, "I was really emotional by the end because I'm quite overwhelmed by everything anyway, and then I had a vision of my ex, of him watching me at home and he's going to be laughing at me because he knows I'm crying because of him, with him thinking, 'Yep, she's still wrapped around my finger'. Then everyone stood up, so I was overwhelmed."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a304126/adele-explains-brits-tears.html|title=Adele explains Brits tears|first=Ryan|last=Love|publisher=Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi Médias|date=16 February 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> A writer of ''[[Daily Mirror]]'' said that "Adele stole the show [...] with her {{Sic|hide=y|universally|-}}praised performance of Someone Like You."<ref name="mirrorbrits" /> Neil McCormick of ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' chose the song as a highlight on the show saying that Adele knocked "everyone for six with no bells and whistles, just a piano, her gorgeous voice and a monster song, Someone Like You."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-news/8327883/Brit-Awards-2011-the-highs-and-lows.html|title=Brit Awards 2011: the highs and lows|work=The Daily Telegraph|publisher=Telegraph Media Group|date=16 February 2011|first=Neil|last=McCormick|accessdate=27 September 2011|location=London}}</ref> Later, the song was performed during a VH1 special called "Unplugged".<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1659119/adele-vh1-unplugged-performance-was-complete-joy.jhtml|title=Adele Says VH1 'Unplugged' Performance 'Was A Complete Joy'|first=James|last=Montgomery|publisher=MTV News. MTV Networks|date=3 March 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> Adele also performed the song at ''[[Jimmy Kimmel Live!]]'' on 24 February 2011.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.spin.com/articles/watch-adele-and-bright-eyes-rock-late-night|title=WATCH: Adele and Bright Eyes Rock Late Night|first=Kevin|last=O'Donnell|work=Spin|publisher=Spin Media LLC|date=25 February 2011|accessdate=28 September 2011}}</ref> The same day she performed "Someone Like You" on ''[[The Ellen DeGeneres Show]]''.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/472799/adeles-21-sells-over-350k-to-top-billboard-200|title=Adele's '21' Sells Over 350k to Top Billboard 200|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|first=Keith|last=Caulfield|location=Los Angeles|date=2 March 2011|accessdate=1 October 2011}}</ref>

The singer also performed the song at the [[2011 MTV Video Music Awards]] held at the Nokia Theatre in Los Angeles on 28 August 2011.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/photos/live/467708/mtv-vmas-2011-katy-perry-adele-pregnant-beyonce-steal-the-show|title=MTV VMAs 2011: Katy Perry, Adele & Pregnant Beyonce Steal the Show|author=Billboard Staff|work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]]|date=28 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> After being introduced by American singer [[Katy Perry]], Adele appeared in a black scalloped lace dress by Barbara Tfank,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/alltherage/2011/08/vmas-fashion-boys-rule.html|title=MTV VMAs: Fashion, boys rule|work=[[Los Angeles Times]]|publisher=Eddy Hartenstein. Tribune Company|date=29 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011|first=Booth|last=Moore}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/alltherage/2011/08/frugal-fashion-adele-mtv-vma-burberry-rolling-in-the-deep.html|title=Frugal Fashion: Adele is a classic hit at the 2011 MTV VMAs|date=31 August 2011|first=Jenn|last=Harris|work=Los Angeles Times|publisher=Eddy Hartenstein. Tribune Company|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> and standing alone on the stage, only with her pianist behind her.<ref name="vmas2011">{{cite news|url=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1669850/vmas-adele-someone-like-you-performance.jhtml|title=Adele Caps Huge Year With 'Someone Like You' At VMAs|publisher=MTV. MTV Networks|date=28 August 2011|first=Kelley|last=L. Carter|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> Her hair was pulled back and a signature ponytail draped over one shoulder she sang the song and "did vocal aerobics and dripped her soulful, sultry sound over the dark ballad, while a transfixed audience watched her" as stated by Kelley L. Carter of [[MTV]].<ref name="vmas2011" /> After the performance she received a standing ovation from fans and critics.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/3782440/Beyoncs-pregnant-and-Lady-GaGas-a-fella-at-MTV-Awards.html|title=Beyoncé's pregnant and Lady GaGa's a fella at MTV Awards|work=[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]|publisher=[[News International]]|first1=France|last1=Anthony|first2=Pink|last2=Stuart|date=30 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011|location=London}}</ref> According to ''[[USA Today]]''{{'}}s Cindy Clark she "captivated the audience with her powerful performance".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/awards/mtvmusicawards/story/2011-08-29/The-breakout-star-at-MTV-VMAs-Beyonces-baby-bump/50170600/1|title=The breakout star at MTV VMAs: Beyonce's baby bump|author=Clark, Cindy and Alexander, Bryan|date=29 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011|work=USA Today}}</ref> Wesley Case of ''[[The Baltimore Sun]]'' concluded, "Adele's 'Someone Like You' could make a tough guy weep. Her tone was gorgeous."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-08-29/entertainment/bal-mtv-video-music-awards-2011-stray-thoughts-and-musings-20110829_1_beyonce-and-jay-z-mtv-video-music-awards-awards-show|title=MTV Video Music Awards 2011: Stray thoughts and musings|first=Wesley|last=Case|date=29 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011|work=[[The Baltimore Sun]]|publisher=[[Tribune Company]]}}</ref> Rating the performance with A, Claire Suddath of [[Time (magazine)|''Time'' magazine]] said "it's heartening to hear a truly talented woman sing a mournful torch song for someone who has left her for someone better. And if her stellar performance, accompanied by only a piano, isn't enough to melt your heart, then her nervous wave to the audience at the end definitely will."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2090903_2090901_2090897,00.html|title=Adele, 'Someone Like You'|page=4|work=[[Time (magazine)|Time]]|publisher=[[Time Inc.]]|first=Claire|last=Suddath|date=29 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> A writer of ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' called her vocals "strong and direct, and tackles grief by moving with the melody rather than trying to pummel it" and added that it was "less-is-more performance, a tactic award-show producers rarely indulge in, but Adele needs few adornments to impress."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2011/08/mtv-vmas-odd-futures-nerves-and-adeles-elegance-.html|title=MTV VMAs: Odd Future's nerves and Adele's elegance|work=Los Angeles Times|publisher=Eddy Hartenstein. Tribune Company|date=28 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> A writer of ''[[Rolling Stone]]'' said that Adele brought a "big dollop of elegance to the VMAs with a spare, moving rendition of 'Someone Like You'" and added that "amid all the pop art glitz, it was a refreshing palate cleanser."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.rollingstone.com/videos/new-and-hot/adele-performs-someone-like-you-at-the-vmas-20110828|title=Adele Performs 'Someone Like You' at the VMAs|work=[[Rolling Stone]]|publisher=[[Jann Wenner|Wenner Media]]|date=28 August 2011|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref>

Gina Sepre of [[E! Online]] praised the performance saying, "When Adele took the stage to perform her understatedly stripped-down and hugely impactful performance of 'Someone Like You,' there were no pyrotechnics, no acrobatics, no lavender hair, and no autotune. And guess what? We didn't miss it. There may be hope yet for MTV to remember just what the 'M' in their name actually stands for."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://uk.eonline.com/news/Five_Biggest_Jaw_Droppers_From_the_VMAs_mdash_Not_Including_Beyonc_eacute__s_Baby_Bump/260655|title=Five Biggest Jaw-Droppers From the VMAs—Not Including Beyoncé's Baby Bump|publisher=[[E! Online]]. [[E!]]|first=Gina|last=Sepre|date=29 August 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> Writing about the performance, Chris Coplan of [[Consequence of Sound]] concluded that "Someone like You", "highlighted the power a bare-bones, booming performance can have in netting people's attention. Simple is not a bad word, pop music."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://consequenceofsound.net/2011/08/video-2011-video-music-awards-recap/|title=Video: 2011 Video Music Awards performances|publisher=[[Consequence of Sound]]|first=Chris|last=Coplan|date=28 August 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref> Giving the performance an A+, Lindsey Ward of [[Jam!]] said: "When I learned British chart-topper Adele would be performing at Sunday's awards I thought, 'Whew – at least we're guaranteed five solid, meaningful minutes of quality music television'. I was right; her frill-free performance of breakup ballad Someone Like You was just that."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://jam.canoe.ca/Music/2011/08/29/pf-18611481.html|title=Ten shocking VMA moments|publisher=[[Jam!]]|first=Lindsey|last=Ward|date=29 August 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> Kyle Anderson of ''[[Entertainment Weekly]]'' highlighted the performance calling it "one of the best performances of the show."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://music-mix.ew.com/2011/08/29/mtv-2011-vmas-eight-things-you-didnt-get-to-see/|work=[[Entertainment Weekly]]|publisher=[[Time Inc.]]|title=MTV 2011 VMAs: What you didn't see on TV|first=Kyle|last=Anderson|accessdate=26 September 2011}}</ref> Another writer of the same publication gave the performance a grade of A+ and wrote: "It takes a real super power to make the seizure-inducing lasers stop, and that power's name is Adele. The broadcast temporarily abandoned its frantic mission of nonstop overstimulation, bowing to the 23-year-old English soulstress's soaring, nearly [[a cappella]] (well done, subtle piano man) rendition of her heart-wrecking ballad "Someone Like You." In a modest black dress and with a few spare hand movements, she delivered all the shock and awe of a million-watt showstopper. Who needs special effects, when God gave you your own? Even [[Britney Spears]] looked like she had to fix her [[mascara]] when it was all over."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20387882_20523784,00.html#21047402|title=Adele – MTV VMAs 2011: Grading the Perofmrances|page=4|work=Entertainment Weekly|publisher=Time Inc.|accessdate=26 September 2011|first1=Leah|last1=Greenblatt|first2=Melissa|last2=Maerz|date=1 September 2011}}</ref>

"Someone like You" was also added to the set list of the second concert tour by Adele, [[Adele Live]], and it was performed during the encore.<ref name="rollshow">{{cite news|url=http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/adele-kicks-off-north-american-tour-with-emotional-d-c-show-20110513|title=Adele Kicks Off North American Tour With Emotional D.C. Show|work=Rolling Stone|publisher=Wenner Media|date=13 May 2011|first=Evan|last=Serpick|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref><ref name="tour">{{cite news|url=http://www.mtv.co.uk/news/adele/332893-adele-live-review-beyonce-amy-winehouse-simon-cowell|title=Adele Live Review|publisher=MTV UK. MTV Networks|date=20 September 2011|first=Joanne|last=Dorken|accessdate=28 September 2011}}</ref> While reviewing a concert by Adele, Joanne Dorken of MTV UK, said "There wasn't a dry eye in the house as Adele powered her way through the ballad, encouraging the audience to help her sing the somewhat beautiful, yet emotional chorus – giving everyone goosebumps. The sounds of Someone Like You bounced off every wall and tugged at every heart-string, making it a truly special moment and something that every member of the Apollo crowd will never forget."<ref name="tour" /> Jim Harrington of ''[[San Jose Mercury News]]'' chose the song as a highlight on the show adding that the song showed "her supreme vocal talent."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/entertainment-headlines/ci_18683829|title=Review: Adele delivers uneven show in Berkeley|first=Jim|last=Harrington|date=15 August 2011|accessdate=1 October 2011|work=[[San Jose Mercury News]]|publisher=[[MediaNews Group]]}}</ref>

==Cover versions==
{{multiple image
| footer = The song has been covered by multiple artists including [[Taio Cruz]] (''left'') and [[Katy Perry]] (''right'').
| image1 = TC Wiki Image 2012.jpg
| alt1 =
| width1 = 150
| image2 = Katy Perry at the 2011 Logie Awards.jpg
| alt2 =
| width2 = 150
}}
The song was sampled by [[Young Money Entertainment]] rapper, [[Tyga]], on his song "Reminded". Although Adele is credited as a featured artist, the sample was pitched up to fit the song's tempo.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.whosampled.com/sample/view/101620/Tyga%20feat.%20Adele-Reminded_Adele-Someone%20Like%20You/ |title=Tyga feat. Adele's Reminded sample of Adele's Someone Like You |author= |date= |work= |publisher=[[whosampled.com]] |accessdate=8 August 2011}}</ref> [[Amber Riley]], an American actress and singer posted a cover of the song on the Internet. After the cover, Adele sent her a "touching" e-mail.<ref name="riley">{{cite web |url=http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/s57/glee/news/a342159/glee-amber-riley-i-want-adele-as-my-best-friend.html|title='Glee' Amber Riley: 'I want Adele as my best friend'|publisher=Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi Médias|date=24 September 2011|first=Daniel|last=Sperling|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> In March 2011, English singer [[Connie Talbot]] sent a cover of the song on [[YouTube]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.okmagazine.com/2011/03/watch-10-year-old-connie-talbot-cover-adeles-someone-like-you/|title=Watch 10-Year-Old Connie Talbot Cover Adele's "Someone Like You"|work=[[OK!]]|publisher=[[Northern & Shell]]|date=31 March 2011|first=Nicole|last=Eggenberger|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://blog.vh1.com/2011-03-31/this-someone-like-you-cover-is-british-catnip/|title=This "Someone Like You" Cover Is British Catnip|publisher=[[VH1]]. MTV Networks|date=31 March 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> Jarett Wieselman of ''[[New York Post]]'' praised the cover saying that it contained "all the emotion despite none of the relevant life experience."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/year_old_phenom_covers_adele_katy_zTNnX4i06NV1V3I7gcHz0M|title=10-year-old phenom slays Adele, Katy & my heart|work=[[New York Post]]|publisher=[[News Corporation]]|first=Jarett|last=Wieselman|date=31 March 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref> In March 2011, British singer [[Jamie Woon]] covered the song at [[BBC Radio 1]]'s [[Live Lounge]].<ref>{{cite web|last=Fitzmaurice|first=Larry|title=Jamie Woon: "Someone Like You" (Adele cover) (Live)|url=http://pitchfork.com/forkcast/15591-someone-like-you-adele-cover-live/|publisher=Pitchfork Media|date=28 March 2011|accessdate=30 November 2011}}</ref> In April 2011, [[Walk Off the Earth]] released a cover of the song on YouTube where they used a piano and a ukulele as instruments;<ref>{{cite web|title=Ook Adele gecoverd door Canadese groep Walk off the Earth|url=http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=DMF20120109_020|work=[[Het Nieuswblad]]|accessdate=21 February 2013|language=Dutch|date=9 January 2012}}</ref> it has received over 15 million views since then.<ref>{{cite web|title=Someone Like You - [Walk off the Earth] - Adele Cover|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U0NFgoNI7s|publisher=Youtube|accessdate=21 February 2013|author=walkofftheearth|date=10 April 2011}}</ref> In September 2011, [[Charlie Puth & Emily Luther]] did a cover of the song for a [[Paris Hilton]] cover contest.<ref>{{cite web|title=Adele - Someone Like You|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAHyGbOXoF4|publisher=Youtube|accessdate=21 February 2013|author=Charlie Puth|date=25 September 2011}}</ref> The band was later discovered by [[Ellen DeGeneres]] who signed them on her label.<ref>{{cite web|title=An Amazing Cover of Adele's 'Someone Like You'|url=http://www.ellentv.com/2011/10/05/an-amazing-cover-of-adeles-someone-like-you/|publisher=EllenTV.com|accessdate=21 February 2013|date=4 October 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Ellen Signs New eleveneleven Artists!|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsF-HgEHAU4|publisher=Youtube|accessdate=21 February 2013|author=TheEllenShow|date=5 October 2011}}</ref> On 12 October 2011, American singer-songwriter [[Katy Perry]] [[Mashup (music)|mashed]] her song "[[The One That Got Away (Katy Perry song)|The One That Got Away]]" (2011) with "Someone Like You" during her headline show at [[Motorpoint Arena Sheffield]], [[Sheffield]], [[England]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nme.com/news/katy-perry/59823|title=Watch Katy Perry covering Adele's 'Someone Like You' – video|last= |first=|date=15 October 2011|work=NME|publisher=IPC Media|accessdate=29 October 2011}}</ref> In November 2011, British rapper [[Taio Cruz]], also covered the song.<ref name="taio">{{cite web|last=Costello|first=Carly|title=Watch Taio Cruz Cover Adele's "Someone Like You"|url=http://www.artistdirect.com/entertainment-news/article/watch-taio-cruz-cover-adele-s-someone-like-you/9801556|publisher=[[Artistdirect]]|date=22 November 2011|accessdate=30 November 2011}}</ref> According to Carly Costello of the website Artistdirect, "Cruz does a 'dynamite' job with the song. No Autotune. No studio treatment. No bells and whistles. Just simple, raw, unbridled emotion."<ref name="taio" /> [[Electro (music)|Electro-funk]] band Friends Electric recorded a version of the song that is available as a free download on [[RCRD LBL]].<ref name="rcrdlbl">{{cite web|title=Friends Electric - Someone Like You (Adele Cover)|url=http://rcrdlbl.com/artists/Friends_Electric/track/Someone_Like_You_Adele_Cover_/|accessdate=7 April 2013}}</ref> Amber Riley, [[Naya Rivera]] and [[Heather Morris]] sang a mash-up of "Someone like You" and Adele's other song "[[Rumour Has It (Adele song)|Rumour Has It]]" (2011) during ''[[Glee (TV series)|Glee]]''{{'}}s episode "[[Mash Off]]" which aired on 15 November.<ref name="rollglee">{{cite news|url=http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/glee-mixes-toby-keith-and-adele-for-300th-musical-performance-20111027|title='Glee' to Feature Toby Keith, Adele in New Episodes|first=Mikael|last=Wood|work=Rolling Stone|publisher=Wenner Media|date=27 October 2011|accessdate=31 October 2011}}</ref><ref name="eglee">{{cite news|url=http://uk.eonline.com/news/watch_with_kristin/watch_now_first_look_darren_criss/271981|title=Watch Now: First Look at Darren Criss Singing Katy Perry on Glee!|publisher=E! Online. NBC Universal|first=Jenna|last=Mullins|date=27 October 2011|accessdate=31 October 2011}}</ref> However, the cover was posted online on 10 November.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/ustv/s57/glee/news/a350279/glees-amber-riley-naya-rivera-perform-adele-mashup-watch-video.html|title='Glee's Amber Riley, Naya Rivera perform Adele mashup – Watch video|publisher=Digital Spy. Hachette Filipacchi Médias|first=Tara|last=Fowler|date=10 November 2011|accessdate=14 November 2011}}</ref> Jenna Mullins of E! Online praised the cover saying that it will "knock your socks right off"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://uk.eonline.com/news/watch_with_kristin/watch_now_glees_epic_300th_musical/274383|title=Watch Now: Glee's Epic 300th Musical Performance! Plus—Can You Spot the Brittana Moment?|publisher=E! Online|first=Jenna|last=Mullins|date=10 November 2011|accessdate=14 November 2011}}</ref> and a writer for ''OK!'' described it as "AMAZE-ing".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ok.co.uk/celebrity-news/view/42015/Glee-s-Santana-serenades-Brittany-with-an-Adele-Rumour-Has-It-and-Someone-Like-You-mash-up/|title=Glee's Santana serenades Brittany with an Adele Rumour Has It and Someone Like You mash-up|work=OK!|publisher=Northern & Shell|date=11 November 2011|accessdate=14 November 2011}}</ref> Erica Futterman of ''Rolling Stone'' noted that the cover was "one of the greatest things the show has done [so far]."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/glee-recap-adele-makes-mash-off-a-resounding-success-20111116|title='Glee' Recap: Adele Makes 'Mash Off' a Resounding Success|first=Erica|last=Futterman|work=Rolling Stone|publisher=Wenner Media|date=16 November 2011|accessdate=23 November 2011}}</ref> Similarly, ''Billboard''{{'}}s Raye Votta commented that the cover was "arguably the best performance 'Glee' has done since '[[Don't Stop Believin'#Glee cover|Don't Stop Believin']]'."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/465103/glee-tugs-at-heartstrings-with-adele-mashup-falls-flat-elsewhere|title='Glee' Tugs At Heartstrings With Adele Mashup, Falls Flat Elsewhere|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|location=New York|first=Rae|last=Votta|page=2|date=16 November 2011|accessdate=23 November 2011}}</ref> Their version of the song peaked at number 11 on the [[Billboard Hot 100|''Billboard'' Hot 100]] while selling 160,000 digital downloads in its first week and became the fifth highest digital sales week by a ''Glee'' Cast single.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/464972/weekly-chart-notes-glee-cast-lady-gaga-brantley-gilbert|title=Weekly Chart Notes: 'Glee' Cast, Lady Gaga, Brantley Gilbert|last=Trust|first=Gary|date=25 November 2011|accessdate=26 November 2011|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/464987/rihannas-love-still-leads-hot-100-katy-perry-back-in-top-10|title=Rihanna's 'Love' Still Leads Hot 100, Katy Perry Back in Top 10|date= 23 November 2011|first=Keith|last=Caulfield|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|accessdate=26 November 2011}}</ref> As of March 2015, it remains the ninth best-selling ''Glee'' Cast recording in the show's history, having sold 413,000 copies in the United States.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop-shop/6509278/glee-cast-10-best-selling-downloads |title='Glee' Cast's 10 Best-Selling Downloads |work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]] |publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]] |date=20 March 2015 |accessdate=20 March 2015}}</ref> In Canada, the song made a "Hot Shot Debut" on the [[Canadian Hot 100]] at number 12, selling 14,000 downloads.<ref name="Can">{{Cite web|url=http://en-ca.nielsen.com/content/dam/nielsen/en_ca/documents/pdf/newsletters/billboard_canadian-update/Nielsen%20Music%20Canadian%20Update.pdf|title=Nielsen Music: Canadian Update (November 25, 2011)|date=25 November 2011|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|accessdate=24 November 2011}}</ref> The song peaked at #35 on the [[UK Singles Chart]], the first Glee recording to make the UK top 40 since "I Feel Pretty / Unpretty". In January 2012, [[Boyce Avenue]] also made a cover of the song.<ref>{{cite web|title=Boyce Avenue - New Acoustic Sessions, Vol. 3|url=https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/new-acoustic-sessions-vol./id492992095|publisher=iTunes|accessdate=28 January 2012|date=2 January 2012}}</ref> British singer-songwriter [[Pixie Lott]] also covered the song when she did a medley of "Someone Like You", "[[I Need A Dollar]]", "[[Lights On (Katy B song)|Lights On]]" and "[[Beautiful People (Chris Brown song)|Beautiful People]]" at the Isle of Wight Festival on 12 June 2011. [[Pixie Lott]] did her own take on the song, performing a more up-beat version. The Metro placed it as number 10 in its "Isle Of Wight Festival 2011: Top 10 Moments", describing it as "standing out".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://metro.co.uk/2011/06/13/isle-of-wight-festival-2011-top-10-moments-41509/|title=Isle Of Wight Festival 2011: Top 10 Moments|publisher=Metro|date=13 June 2011|accessdate=13 January 2013}}</ref> Despite the constant downpour of heavy rain, she was in high spirits.
In December, 2011 [[Austin Mahone]] released a cover of the song with a music video online.<ref>http://www.nme.com/nme-video/youtube/id/EPY8NJr5yOo</ref>
[[X Factor (Romania)|Romanian X Factor]] [[X Factor (Romania season 1)|season one]] winner [[X Factor (Romania season 1)|Andrei Leonte]] sang "Someone like You" during the grand final on 1 January 2012. He sang "Someone like You" as the last act and therefore the Winner's Single. He won by 51% audience votes with his performance of the song making his mentor [[Radio DJ]] Mihai Morar cry while judge [[Paula Seling]] call it an "astonishing performance of one of 2011s biggest hits".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.agenda.ro/news/news/50426/x-factor-romania-are-un-prim-castigator-andrei-leonte-%7C-video.html|title=Romania found its X Factor! Watch his emotional performance!|date=1 January 2012|accessdate=2012-01-02}}</ref>
The winner of the [[The X Factor (U.S. season 1)|first season]] of ''[[The X Factor (U.S.)|The X Factor]]'' in America performed the song in a "heavy techno beat" way during the semi-finals.<ref>{{cite web|last=Maher|first=Cristin|title='X Factor' Hopeful Melanie Amaro Blows Everyone Away With Adele, Whitney Houston Performances|url=http://popcrush.com/x-factor-melanie-amaro-adele-whitney-houston-performances/|work=PopCrush|accessdate=11 January 2012|date=7 December 2011}}</ref>

Country musician [[David Nail]] recorded a cover of "Someone like You", which was posted on his YouTube account on 15 May 2012. The song is featured on Nail's three-track digital EP, ''1979'' which was released on 17 July 2012.<ref>{{cite web|title=David Nail Releases 1979 on July 17, 2012|url=http://www.davidnail.com/news_d.aspx?nid=7689|accessdate=29 June 2012|date=29 June 2012}}</ref> Nail's version debuted at number 57 on the ''Billboard'' [[Hot Country Songs]] chart in September 2012, reaching as high as number 52.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/#/column/chartbeat/chart-highlights-muse-returns-david-nail-1007901352.story|title=Chart Highlights: Muse Returns, David Nail Covers Adele|work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]]|accessdate=27 August 2012}}</ref> Metalcore band [[Ice Nine Kills]] released a cover version in 2012.

Manel Amara, a [[Tunisia]]n singer, released an [[Arabic]] version in 2014, ([[Arabic|Ar]]: سمعت عليك - [[Transliteration|Translit]]: Sma'at Aleik - [[English language|Eng]] : I heard that you), on [[Valentine's Day]]. Filipino singer [[Jaya (singer)|Jaya]] also did the song. Another [[Filipino people|Filipino]] singer who made a cover of the song is [[Sarah Geronimo]], [[Regine Velasquez]], [[Anne Curtis]], [[Aegis (band)|Aegis]] and [[Sharon Cuneta]].

"Someone Like You" was covered by [[Brent Smith]] and [[Zach Myers]] of American [[hard rock]] band [[Shinedown]] on their 2014 ''[[(Acoustic Sessions)]]'' EP.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://loudwire.com/shinedown-brent-smith-zach-myers-acoustic-covers-ep/ | title=Brent Smith & Zach Myers release Acoustic Covers EP | accessdate=30 April 2014}}</ref>
In the same year during a hospital visit by [[Taylor Swift]].<ref>[http://news.mtv.it/gossip/taylor-swift-canta-someone-like-you-di-adele-durante-una-visita-in-ospedale/ Taylor Swift sings "Someone like you"] MTV Italy</ref>

==Usage in media==
"Someone like You" was used in several movies and soundtracks after its release.<ref name="mccormick">{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/8430164/Adele-shes-stopped-us-in-her-tracks.html|title=Adele: she's stopped us in her tracks|work=The Daily Telegraph|publisher=Telegraph Media Group|first=Neil|last=McCormick|date=6 April 2011|accessdate=1 October 2011|location=London}}</ref> The song was featured during the closing of the ''[[Grey's Anatomy]]'' episode "This Is How We Do It."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tvfanatic.com/2011/03/greys-anatomy-music-from-this-is-how-we-do-it/ |title=Grey's Anatomy Music From "This is How We Do It" |author= |date=25 March 2011 |work= |publisher=TV Fanatic|accessdate= 21 August 2011}}</ref> It was also featured during the season 4 finale of ''[[Secret Diary of a Call Girl]]''; however, the song did not feature on the DVD release. The song also appeared on Australian drama, ''[[Winners & Losers]]'' on 14 June. The song was also included in the international soundtrack to ''[[Fina Estampa]]'', a Brazilian telenovela.

On 12 November 2011 during episode of American television network [[NBC|NBC's]] ''[[Saturday Night Live]]'', an entire skit was dedicated to the song, parodying the strong emotion behind the song, and how women listen to it repeatedly when at their most sorrowful moment. The skit later also had the men "touched" by the song, and they too joined in the weeping with the women. A cutaway during the skit also displayed the members of the British band [[Coldplay]], who was the episode's musical guest, weeping to the song.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/viral-videos/465150/coldplay-on-snl-crying-to-adele-chris-martin-rocks-a-holiday|title=Coldplay on 'SNL': Crying to Adele, Chris Martin Rocks a Holiday Vest|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|first=Jillian|last=Mapes|location=New York|date=14 November 2011|accessdate=14 November 2011}}</ref>

==Credits and personnel==
Credits are taken from ''21'' [[liner notes]].<ref name="Booklet" />
*[[Adele|Adele Adkins]] – [[songwriter]], [[record producer|producer]], [[lead vocals]]
*[[Dan Wilson (musician)|Dan Wilson]] – [[songwriter]], [[record producer|producer]], [[piano]]
*[[Philip Allen (audio engineer)|Philip Allen]] – [[Audio engineering|engineer]]
*[[Tom Coyne (music engineer)|Tom Coyne]] – [[Audio mastering|mastering]]
*[[Tom Elmhirst]] – [[Audio mixing (recorded music)|mixer]]
*[[Dan Parry]] – assistant mixer

==Track listings==
{{tracklist
| headline = Digital download<ref name="Amazon"/><ref name="HMV Digital">{{cite web|publisher=HMV Digital. HMV|url=http://www.hmvdigital.com/artist/adele/someone-like-you|title=Someone Like You by Adele|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=18 March 2011}}</ref><ref name="TuneTribe">{{cite web|url=http://www.tunetribe.com/product/adele-someone-like-you?id=5055027&ref=_irf_arp|title=Adele – Someone Like You|publisher=TuneTribe|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=18 March 2011}}</ref><ref name="Tesco Entertainment">{{cite web|publisher=Tesco Entertainment. [[Tesco]]|url=http://www.tescoentertainment.com/store/mp3/adele--someone-like-you/2%3a50953273/|title=Adele – Someone Like You – Free Delivery – Tesco Entertainment|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=18 March 2011}}</ref>
| writing_credits = yes
| extra_column = Producer(s)
| title1 = Someone like You
| writer1 = {{flatlist|
* [[Adele|Adele Adkins]]
* Dan Wilson
}}
| extra1 = {{flatlist|
* Dan Wilson
* Adele Adkins
}}
| length1 = 4:47
}}

{{tracklist
| headline = [[2011 BRIT Awards]] performance<ref name="britsliveuk" />
| title1 = Someone like You: Live from the BRITs
| writer1 = {{flatlist|
* [[Adele|Adele Adkins]]
* Dan Wilson
}}
| extra1 = iTunes
| length1 = 5:10
}}

{{tracklist
| headline = [[Amazon MP3]] free download<ref>http://www.rickey.org/adele-someone-like-you-performed-live-in-her-home-free-mp3-from-amazon/</ref>
| title1 = Someone like You (Performed Live in Her Home)
| writer1 = {{flatlist|
* [[Adele|Adele Adkins]]
* Dan Wilson
}}
| extra1 = [[Amazon MP3]]
| length1 = 5:22
}}

{{tracklist
| headline = Australian single<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/au/album/someone-like-you-live-from/id441922633?i=441922635&ign-mpt=uo%3D4|title=Someone Like You – Single – Adele|publisher=[[iTunes Store|iTunes Store Australia]]. [[Apple Inc.]]|accessdate=29 September 2011}}</ref>
| writing_credits = yes
| title1 = Someone like You
| writer1 = {{flatlist|
* Adkins
* Wilson
}}
| extra1 = {{flatlist|
* Adkins
* Wilson
}}
| length1 = 4:47
| title2 = Someone like You: Live from the BRITs
| writer2 = {{flatlist|
* Adkins
* Wilson
}}
| extra2 = {{flatlist|
* Adkins
* Wilson
}}
| length2 = 5:10
}}

==Charts and certifications==
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}

===Weekly charts===
{|class="wikitable sortable"
|-
! scope="col"|Chart (2011–12)
! scope="col"|Peak position
|-
{{singlechart|Australia|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 June 2011|refname=aus}}
|-
{{singlechart|Austria|2|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=11 October 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Flanders|2|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Wallonia|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
| Brazil (''[[Billboard Brasil|Billboard]]'' [[Brasil Hot 100 Airplay|Hot 100 Airplay]])<ref>"Brasil Hot 100 Airplay". Billboard Brasil (Brasil: bpp) (2): 96. January 2012.</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
| Brazil ([[Billboard Brasil|''Billboard'' Hot Pop]])<ref>"Brasil Hot Pop & Popular Songs". Billboard Brasil (Brasil: bpp) (99): 189 December 2011</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|Canada ([[Canadian Hot 100]])<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://acharts.us/song/60744|title=Adele – Someone Like You – Music Charts|work=aCharts|accessdate=10 June 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|2
|-
{{singlechart|Czech Republic|1|year=2011|week=34|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Denmark|2|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
|Europe ([[Euro Digital Songs]])<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/11938818 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Euro Digital Songs 2011-03-05 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kTn3YvA | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
{{singlechart|Finland|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=22 October 2011}}
|-
|{{singlechart|France|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Germany|4|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You}}
|-
|Greece Digital Songs (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/14055237 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Greece Digital Songs 2012-01-21 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kUoiHxr | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|8
|-
{{singlechart|Hungary|5|year=2011|week=46|accessdate=24 November 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Ireland|1|year=2011|week=9|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Israelairplay|2|year=2011|week=14|artist=ADELE|song=Someone Like You}}
|-
{{singlechart|Italy|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 June 2011}}
|-
|Japan ([[Japan Hot 100]])<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/14066107 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Japan Hot 100 Singles 2012-03-03 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kUue2O3 | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|43
|-
|Luxemburg Digital Songs (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/12020327 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Luxembourg Digital Songs 2011-12-17 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kUiIkKD | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|4
|-
|Mexico Airplay (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/albums/14052407 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Mexico Airplay 2012-01-07 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kTsCM2G | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|7
|-
{{singlechart|Dutch40|3|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=29 April 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Dutch100|2|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=29 April 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|New Zealand|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=10 May 2011|refname=nz}}
|-
{{singlechart|Norway|5|artist=Adele|song=Someone like You|accessdate=18 April 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Poland|1|chartid=555|year=2011|accessdate=19 December 2011}}
|-
|Poland Digital Songs (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/14055547 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Poland Digital Songs 2012-01-21 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kUOZpFk | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|Portugal Digital Songs (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/11981667 | publisher = [[Billboard.biz]] | accessdate = 7 August 2012 | title = Chart Search Results - Portugal Digital Songs 2011-08-06 | archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/69kUanSqC | archivedate = 7 August 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|Romania ([[Romanian Top 100]])<ref>[http://www.rt100.ro Romanian Top 100: 3 July – 10 July 2011]</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|2
|-
{{singlechart|Scotland|1|date=2011-02-26|accessdate=26 February 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Slovakia|4|artist=Adele|year=2011|week=24|accessdate=11 May 2011}}
|-
|South Korea International Singles ([[Gaon Chart|Gaon]])<ref name="SouthKoreaDebut2">{{cite web|url=http://www.gaonchart.co.kr/main/section/total/list.gaon?mainGbn=CHART&mainCate=1&nationGbn=E&termGbn=week|title=South Korea Gaon International Chart (Week: January 6, 2013)|publisher=[[Gaon Chart]]}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"| 9
|-
{{singlechart|Spain|4|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=21 December 2011}}
|-
|Spain ([[Promusicae|Airplay Chart]])<ref>{{cite web|title=Promusicae (Week: January 1, 2012)|url=http://www.promusicae.org/files/listasradio/historial/TOP%2020%20RADIOS%2012_10.pdf|accessdate=13 July 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
{{singlechart|Sweden|3|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=4 June 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|Switzerland|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|accessdate=4 June 2011}}
|-
{{singlechart|UK|1|artist=Adele|song=Someone Like You|date=26 February 2011}}
|-
|US ''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'' [[Billboard Hot 100|Hot 100]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/74403/week-ending-aug-21-2011-rolling-to-a-record/;_ylt=AijcC6s8lNaBreHICWvmmOcPwiUv|title=Week Ending Aug. 21, 2011: Rolling To A Record|first=Paul|last=Grein|work=Yahoo! Chart Watch|publisher=new.music.yahoo.com|date=24 August 2011|accessdate=24 August 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|US [[Adult Contemporary]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/column/chartbeat#/column/chartbeat/chart-highlights-katy-perry-debuts-on-pop-1005416612.story|title=Chart Highlights: Katy Perry Debuts On Pop Songs, Lady Gaga Leads Dance/Club Play Songs|work=Billboard.com|publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]]|date=17 October 2011|accessdate=17 October 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|US [[Adult Pop Songs]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/column/chartbeat#/column/chartbeat/chart-highlights-dev-dominates-dance-club-1005397952.story|title=Chart Highlights: Dev Dominates Dance/Club Play Songs|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|date=10 October 2011|accessdate=11 October 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|US [[Hot Dance Club Songs]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref name="chartbeat2">{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/467275/chart-highlights-maroon-5-christina-aguileras-jagger-tops-adult|title=Chart Highlights: Maroon 5, Christina Aguilera's 'Jagger' Tops Adult Pop Songs|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|date=26 September 2011|accessdate=27 September 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|24
|-
|{{singlechart|Billboardrocksongs|24|artist=Adele|artistid=278035}}
|-
|US [[Latin Pop Songs]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/467382/chart-highlights-rodney-atkins-takes-back-road-to-no-1-on-country|title=Chart Highlights: Rodney Atkins Takes 'Back Road' To No. 1 On Country Songs|work=Billboard|publisher=Prometheus Global Media|date=19 September 2011|accessdate=20 September 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|6
|-
|US [[Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs)|Pop Songs]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref name="chartbeat2"/>
| style="text-align:center;"|2
|}
{| class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders" style="text-align:center;"
|-
! scope="col" | Chart (2014)
! scope="col" | Peak position
|-
{{singlechart|Czechdigital|99|year=2014|week=25|accessdate=July 3, 2014}}
|}
{{col-2}}

===Certifications===
{{certification Table Top}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Australia|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|number=7|certyear=2012|relyear=2011|autocat=yes}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Belgium|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|certyear=2011|relyear=2011|autocat=yes|accessdate=17 December 2011}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Brazil|artist=Adele|title=Like You|award=Platinum|salesamount=100,000|certyear=2013|realyear=2011|autocat=yes|accessdate=3 January 2013}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|digital=true|region=Canada|number=7|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|certyear=2012|relyear=2011|autocat=yes|accessdate=1 November 2013}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Denmark|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|certyear=2011|relyear=2011|relmonth=1|relday=19|certref=<ref>{{cite web|title=Certificeringer {{!}} ifpi.dk|url=http://ifpi.dk/?q=certificeringer&page=15|publisher=[[International Federation of the Phonographic Industry|IFPI Danmark]]|accessdate=22 December 2011}}</ref>|autocat=yes}}
{{Certification Table Entry|region=Germany|title=Someone Like You|artist=Adele|award=Platinum|type=single|certyear=2012|relyear=2011|autocat=yes|accessdate=17 December 2011}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Italy|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|number=7|certyear=2011|relyear=2011|certmonth=12|autocat=yes}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Mexico|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum+Gold|number=2|salesamount=150,000|certyear=2014|relyear=2011|certref=<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=294029144055037&set=pb.167176543406965.-2207520000.1400262890.&type=3&theater| title=Mexican sales certification | year=2014 | publisher=[[AMPROFON]]|language=Spanish|accessdate=16 May 2014}}</ref>|autocat=yes}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=New Zealand|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|number=2|certyear=2011|certmonth=9|relyear=2011|autocat=yes|accessdate=12 June 2011|id=1797}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=Spain|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|certyear=2012|relyear=2011|relmonth=2|autocat=yes|certref=<ref>{{cite web|url=http://promusicae.es/files/listastonos/top%2050%20canciones%20(publicar)_w43.2012.pdf |format=PDF|language=Spanish|accessdate=31 October 2012|archivedate=31 October 2012|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6BpJeBRGB |publisher=[[Productores de Música de España]]|title=Top 50 Canciones - Semana 43: del 22.10.2012 al 28.10.2012}}</ref>}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=United Kingdom|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|number=2|certyear=2011|certmonth=4|relyear=2011|salesamount=1,570,000|salesref=<ref name="top 40 2015">{{cite web|url=http://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/the-official-top-40-biggest-selling-singles-of-the-millennium-so-far-revealed__9816/|title=The Official Top 40 Biggest Selling Singles of the Millennium so far revealed|publisher=Official Charts Company|date=11 June 2015|first=Rob|last=Copsey}}</ref>}}
{{certification Table Entry|type=single|region=United States|artist=Adele|title=Someone Like You|award=Platinum|number=5|certyear=2011|certmonth=9|relyear=2011|salesamount=5,576,000|salesref=<ref name="yahoojuly2012"/>}}
{{Certification Table Bottom|nounspecified=yes}}

===Year-end charts===
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!scope="col"|Chart (2011)
!scope="col"|Position
|-
|[[ARIA Charts|Australian Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aria.com.au/pages/documents/ARIAEOYChart2011.pdf|title=Adele's "21" crowned ARIA's highest selling album of 2011 LMFAO takes single honours with "Party Rock Anthem"|accessdate=2012-01-01}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|4
|-
|[[Ö3 Austria Top 40|Austrian Singles Chart]]<ref>http://oe3.orf.at/charts/stories/singleyear/</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|31
|-
|[[Ultratop 50|Belgian Singles Chart]] (Flanders)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ultratop.be/nl/annual.asp?year=2011&cat=s|title=JAAROVERZICHTEN 2011|language=Dutch|accessdate=2011-12-29}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|5
|-
|[[Ultratop 40|Belgian Singles Chart]] (Wallonia)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ultratop.be/fr/annual.asp?year=2011&cat=s|title=RAPPORTS ANNUELS 2011|accessdate=2011-12-29}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|10
|-
|Brazil ''[[Billboard Brasil|Billboard]]'' [[Brasil Hot 100 Airplay|Hot 100 Airplay]]
| style="text-align:center;"|21
|-
| [[Canadian Hot 100]]<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2011/canadian-hot-100?begin=11&order=position | title=Best of 2011:Canadian Hot 100 Songs | work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]] | publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]] | year=2011 | accessdate=11 December 2011}}</ref>
| align="center" | 16
|-
|[[Hitlisten|Danish Singles Chart]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Album-Top 100 |publisher=[[Hitlisten]]. [[IFPI Danmark]]& Nielsen Music Control |url=http://www.hitlisterne.dk/yearlist2011.asp?list=Album%20100 |archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/64uMyOSLI |archivedate=2012-01-23}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|17
|-
| [[Media Control Charts|German Singles Chart]]<ref>http://www.mtv.de/charts/Single_Jahrescharts_2011</ref>
| align="center" | 28
|-
| [[Mahasz|Hungarian Airplay Chart]]<ref>{{cite web |title=MAHASZ Rádiós TOP 100 2011|url=http://zene.slagerlistak.hu/archivum/eves-osszesitett-listak/radios/2011|publisher=''Mahasz'' |language=hungarian |accessdate=18 January 2013}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|44
|-
|[[Irish Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web | title=Irish Charts - Best of 2011 | url=http://irma.ie/best2011.htm| work=| publisher=IRMA | date=15 November 2012}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|[[Media Forest|Israeli Airplay Chart]]<ref>{{cite web | title=Media Forest: Yearly airplay chart - 2011 | url=http://mediaforest.biz/ThisYearCharts.aspx| work=| publisher=mediaforest.biz | date=30 December 2011}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|7
|-
|[[Italian Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fimi.it/dett_ddmercato.php?id=66|title=Classifiche annuali Fimi-GfK: Vasco Rossi con "Vivere o Niente" è stato l'album più venduto nel 2011|publisher=[[Federation of the Italian Music Industry]] |accessdate=16 January 2012|date=16 January 2012|language=Italian}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
| Netherlands ([[Dutch Top 40]])<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.top40jaarlijsten.nl/top_40_2011.html |title=Dutch Charts 2011 |language=Dutch |publisher=top40jaarlijsten.nl. Hung Medien |accessdate=24 December 2011}}</ref>
| align="center" |2
|-
| Netherlands ([[Single Top 100|Mega Single Top 100]])<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dutchcharts.nl/jaaroverzichten.asp?year=2011&cat=s |title=Dutch Charts 2011 |language=Dutch |publisher=Dutchcharts.nl. Hung Medien |accessdate=24 December 2011}}</ref>
| align="center" |10
|-
| [[Recorded Music NZ|New Zealand Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://tvnz.co.nz/entertainment-news/adele-dominates-nz-end-year-charts-4652026|title=Adele dominates NZ end of year charts|accessdate=2011-12-29}}</ref>
| align="center" |4
|-
| [[Sverigetopplistan|Spanish Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.promusicae.es/files/listasanuales/canciones/Top%2050%20CANCIONES%20ANUAL%202011.pdf|title=TOP 50 CANCIONES ANUAL 2011|accessdate=28 January 2012|publisher=PROMUSICAE}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|39
|-
| [[Swiss Hitparade|Swiss Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://swisscharts.com/year.asp?key=2011|title=SWISS YEAR-END CHARTS 2011|language=German|accessdate=2012-01-02}}</ref>
| align="center" |9
|-
| [[UK Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theofficialcharts.com/chart-news/the-top-20-biggest-selling-singles-of-2011-revealed/|title=The Top 20 biggest selling singles of 2011 revealed!|publisher=The Official Charts|date=2 January 2012}}</ref>
| align="center" |1
|-
| US [[Billboard Hot 100|''Billboard'' Hot 100]]<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2011/hot-100-songs | title=Best of 2011: Hot 100 Songs | work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]] | publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]] | year=2011 | accessdate=9 December 2011}}</ref>
| align="center" |24
|-
| US [[Adult Contemporary]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2011/hot-adult-contemporary-songs?begin=21&order=position | title=Best of 2011: Adult Contemporary Songs | work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]] | publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]] | year=2011 | accessdate=11 December 2011}}</ref>
| align="center" |26
|-
| US [[Adult Pop Songs]] (''[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]'')<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2011/hot-adult-pop-songs?begin=11&order=position | title=Best of 2011: Adult Pop Songs | work=[[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]] | publisher=[[Prometheus Global Media]] | year=2011 | accessdate=11 December 2011}}</ref>
| align="center" |17
|-
!scope="col"|Chart (2012)
!scope="col"|Position
|-
|[[Argentine Chamber of Phonograms and Videograms Producers|Argentine Digital Singles Chart]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.capif.org.ar/archivos/Informes/CAPIF%20Informe%20de%20la%20industria%20de%20la%20m%C3%BAsica%202012.pdf|publisher=[[Argentine Chamber of Phonograms and Videograms Producers]]|language=Spanish|format=PDF|accessdate=20 April 2013|title=Mercado argentino de la música 2012}}</ref>
|align="center"|6
|-
|[[Ultratop 50|Belgian Singles Chart]] (Flanders)<ref name="ultratop.be">http://www.ultratop.be/fr/annual.asp?year=2012&cat=a</ref>
|align="center"|30
|-
|[[Ultratop 40|Belgian Singles Chart]] (Wallonia)<ref name="ultratop.be"/>
|align="center"|15
|-
|Brazil ''[[billboard Brasil|Billboard]]'' [[Brasil Hot 100 Airplay|Hot 100 Airplay]]
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|Brazil ''[[Billboard Brasil|Billboard]]'' [[Brasil Hot 100 Airplay|Pop Songs]]<ref>"Brasil Hot Pop". Billboard Brasil (Brasil: bpp) (2): 97. December 2012. ISSN 977-217605400-2</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|1
|-
|scope="row"|Germany (Media Control AG)<ref name="ger2012">{{cite web |url=http://www.viva.tv/charts/52-top-100-jahrescharts-2012 |title=Top 100 Singles Jahrescharts 2012 |language=German |publisher=[[VIVA (TV station)|VIVA]]. [[Viacom International Media Networks (Europe)|Viacom International Media Networks]] |accessdate=5 January 2013}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|54
|-
|Netherlands ([[Single Top 100|Mega Single Top 100]])<ref>{{Cite web | url = http://dutchcharts.nl/jaaroverzichten.asp?year=2012&cat=s | publisher = Dutchcharts.nl. Hung Medien | accessdate = 22 December 2012 | title = Jaaroverzichten - Single 2012 | language = Dutch}}</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|90
|-
|[[Mahasz|Hungarian Airplay Chart]]<ref>{{cite web |title=MAHASZ Rádiós TOP 100 2012|url=http://zene.slagerlistak.hu/archivum/eves-osszesitett-listak/radios/2012|publisher=''Mahasz'' |language=hungarian |accessdate=18 January 2013}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|83
|-
|[[PROMUSICAE|Spanish Singles Chart]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.promusicae.org/files/listasanuales/canciones/Top%2050%20Canciones%20Anual%202012.pdf |title=Top 50 Canciones Anual 2012 |publisher=Promuiscae.es |accessdate=2013-01-15}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|12
|-
|[[Swiss Hitparade|Swiss Singles Chart]]<ref>http://hitparade.ch/year.asp?key=2012</ref>
|style="text-align:center;"|12
|-
|US [[Billboard Hot 100|''Billboard'' Hot 100]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2012/hot-100-songs?begin=41&order=position|title=Best of 2012 - Hot 100 Songs|publisher=Billboard.com|accessdate=2012-12-14|date=}}</ref>
| style="text-align:center;"|43
|-
|}
{{col-end}}

==Release history==
{|class="wikitable"
|-
!Region
!Date
!Format
|-
|United Kingdom<ref name="Amazon">{{cite web|publisher=[[Amazon.com|Amazon UK]]. Amazon Inc.|url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Someone-Like-You/dp/B004QDPA4I/|title=Someone Like You: Adele: Amazon.co.uk: MP3 Downloads|date=24 January 2011|accessdate=18 March 2011}}</ref>
|rowspan="5"|24 January 2011
|rowspan="5"|[[Music download|Digital download]]
|-
|Germany<ref>{{cite web|url=http://de.7digital.com/artists/adele/someone-like-you/|title=Adele – Someone Like You – MP3 Single – Download|publisher=[[7digital]] (Germany)|language=German|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Ireland<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ie.7digital.com/artists/adele/someone-like-you/|title=Adele – Someone Like You MP3 music downloads|publisher=7digital (Ireland)|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Austria<ref>{{cite web|url=http://at.7digital.com/artists/adele/someone-like-you/|title=Adele – Someone Like You – MP3 Single – Download|publisher=7digital (Austria)|language=German|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Switzerland<ref>{{cite web|url=http://de-ch.7digital.com/artists/adele/someone-like-you/|title=Adele – Someone Like You – MP3 Single – Download|publisher=7digital (Switzerland)|language=German|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Netherlands<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/nl/album/someone-like-you-live-from/id426176554|title=iTunes – Muziek – 'Someone Like You (Live from the BRITs)' – Single van ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Netherlands). Apple Inc.|language=Dutch|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|rowspan="2"|17 March 2011
|rowspan="2"|Digital download – Live from the BRITs
|-
|United Kingdom<ref name="britsliveuk">{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/gb/album/someone-like-you-live-from/id426176554|title=iTunes – Music – Someone Like You (Live From the BRITs) – Single by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (United Kingdom). Apple Inc.|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Australia<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/au/album/someone-like-you-single/id441922633|title=iTunes – Music – Someone Like You – Single by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Australia). Apple Inc.|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|rowspan="2"|13 June 2011
|rowspan="2"|Digital download
|-
|New Zealand<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/nz/album/someone-like-you-single/id441922633|title=iTunes – Music – Someone Like You – Single by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (New Zealand). Apple Inc.|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|United States<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gfa.radioandrecords.com/publishGFA/GFANextPage.asp?sDate=08/09/2011&Format=1|title=R&R :: Going For Adds :: CHRT/Top 40|date=9 August 2011|accessdate=29 September 2011|work=[[R&R (magazine)|''R&R'' Magazine]]}}</ref>
|9 August 2011
|Mainstream [[airplay]]
|-
|France<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/fr/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Musique – Someone Like You – Single par ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (France). Apple Inc.|language=French|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|rowspan="7"|30 September 2011
|rowspan="7"|Digital download
|-
|Germany<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/de/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Musik – "Someone Like You – Single" by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Germany). Apple Inc.|language=German|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Luxembourg<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/lu/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Music – Someone Like You – Single by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Luxembourg). Apple Inc.|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Italy<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/it/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Musica – Someone Like You – Single di ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Italy). Apple Inc.|language=Italian|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Canada<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/ca/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Music – Someone Like You – Single by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Canada). Apple Inc.|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Australia<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/au/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Music – Someone Like You – Single by ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Australia). Apple Inc.|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|Austria<ref>{{cite web|url=https://itunes.apple.com/at/album/someone-like-you-single/id464101342|title=iTunes – Musik – "Someone Like You – Single" von ADELE|publisher=iTunes Store (Austria). Apple Inc.|language=German|accessdate=11 November 2011}}</ref>
|-
|}

==See also==
{{div col}}
*[[List of best-selling singles]]
*[[List of best-selling singles in the United States]]
*[[List of million-selling singles in the United Kingdom]]
*[[List of Adult Top 40 number-one singles of 2011]]
*[[List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2011 (U.S.)]]
*[[List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2012 (Brazil)]]
*[[List of number-one singles from the 2010s (UK)]]
*[[List of number-one singles and albums of 2011 (Ireland)]]
*[[List of number-one singles of 2011 (Australia)]]
*[[List of number-one singles from the 2010s (New Zealand)]]
*[[List of number-one hits of 2011 (Italy)]]
*[[List of number-one singles of 2011 (Poland)]]
*[[List of number-one hits of 2011 (France)]]
*[[List of number-one hits of 2011 (Switzerland)]]
*[[List of number-one pop hits of 2011 (Brazil)]]
*[[List of Ultratop 40 number-one singles of 2011]]
{{div col end}}

==References==
{{reflist|30em}}

==Notes==
{{refbegin}}
*{{cite web
| last = Patterson | first =Sylvia
| title = I'm Just a Normal Girl
| work= [[Q (magazine)|Q]]
| publisher= [[Bauer Media Group]]
| date=July 2011
| accessdate=26 September 2011
}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
*[http://www.adele.tv/ Adele Official Site]
* {{MetroLyrics song|adele|someone-like-you}}
* {{YouTube|KDzS9tPuuAk|Official Arabic version Music video}} on "[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfitiUSAsekko4LZJdeSErQ Manel Amara's Channel]" on [[YouTube]]

{{Adele singles}}
{{UK best-selling singles (by year) 2010–2029}}

[[Category:Adele (singer) songs]]
[[Category:2011 singles]]
[[Category:XL Recordings singles]]
[[Category:Songs written by Dan Wilson (musician)]]
[[Category:UK Singles Chart number-one singles]]
[[Category:Irish Singles Chart number-one singles]]
[[Category:Rhythm and blues ballads]]
[[Category:Pop ballads]]
[[Category:2010s ballads]]
[[Category:Torch songs]]
[[Category:Singles certified double platinum by the British Phonographic Industry]]
[[Category:Singles certified double platinum by Recorded Music NZ]]
[[Category:Singles certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America]]
[[Category:Singles certified platinum by the Canadian Recording Industry Association]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in Australia]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in Finland]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in France]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in Italy]]
[[Category:Ultratop 50 Singles (Wallonia) number-one singles]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in New Zealand]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in Poland]]
[[Category:Number-one singles in Switzerland]]
[[Category:Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles]]
[[Category:Billboard Adult Top 40 number-one singles]]
[[Category:Billboard Adult Contemporary number-one singles]]
[[Category:Music videos directed by Jake Nava]]
[[Category:David Nail songs]]
[[Category:Songs written by Adele (singer)]]
[[Category:Compositions in A major]]
[[Category:Black-and-white music videos]]

Islam and cats

2015-03-27T22:22:46Z

89.76.8.142: /* Origins of reverence */

[[File:Cat outside Gazi Husrev-Bey Mosque (6086909198).jpg|thumb|Cat in the courtyard of [[Gazi Husrev-beg Mosque]] in [[Sarajevo]], [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]]]]

The [[cat|domestic cat]] is a revered [[Islam and animals|animal]] in [[Islam]], admired for its cleanliness.<ref name=Campo/>

== Origins of reverence ==

Cats have been venerated in the [[Near East]] since [[ancient Near East|antiquity]], a tradition adopted by Islam, albeit in a much modified form.<ref name=Baldick>{{cite book|title=Mystical Islam: An Introduction to Sufism|last=Baldick|first=Julian|publisher=I.B.Tauris|year=2012|pages=155|isbn=1780762313|accessdate=2013-08-15}}</ref> According to [[Hadith]]s, [[Muhammad]] prohibited the persecution and killing of cats.
[[File:Interior of a school in Cairo (detail).jpg|left|upright|thumb|Cat resting on a pillow next to an imam in Cairo, by [[John Frederick Lewis]]]]
One of Muhammad's [[sahabah|companions]] was known as [[Abu Hurairah]] (literally: "Father of the Kitten", though meaning "The One with/having a kitten") because one day he saw a cat sticking to a wall from the heat of the weather, so he picked it up and carried it in his sleeve in order to protect it from the sun heat. Abu Hurairah claimed that he had heard Mohammed declare that a woman went to [[Jahannam|Hell]] for starving a female kitten and not providing her with any water, but this was disputed by Mohammed's widow [[Aisha]].

There is also the story of [[Muezza]] that was sleeping on the sleeve of a prayer robe. Rather than wake the cat, the sleeve was apparently cut off, leaving the cat undisturbed.

== History ==
The American poet and travel author [[Bayard Taylor]] (1825-1878) was astonished when he discovered a [[Syria]]n hospital where cats roamed freely. The institution, in which domestic felines were sheltered and nourished, was funded by a [[waqf]], along with caretakers' wages, [[veterinary medicine|veterinary care]] and [[cat food]]. [[Edward William Lane]] (1801-1876), British Orientalist who resided in [[Cairo]], described a cat garden originally endowed by the 13th-century Egyptian sultan [[Baibars]], whose European contemporaries held a very different attitude towards cats, eating them or killing them under [[papal decree]]s.<ref name=Campo/> Aside from protecting granaries and food stores from pests, cats were valued by the paper-based Arab-Islamicate cultures for preying on mice that destroyed books. For that reason, cats are often depicted in paintings alongside Islamic scholars and bibliophiles. The medieval Egyptian zoologist [[Al-Damiri]] (1344-1405) wrote that the first cat was created when [[God in Islam|God]] caused a [[lion]] to sneeze, after animals on [[Noah's Ark]] complained of mice.<ref name=Campo>{{cite book|title=Encyclopedia of Islam|last=Campo|first=Juan Eduardo|pages=131|publisher=Infobase Publishing|year=2009|isbn=1438126964|accessdate=2013-08-15}}</ref>

== Hygiene and neutering ==
[[File:Cat outside a mosque.jpg|thumb|Cat outside a mosque in [[Şirince]], [[Turkey]], with people praying in the background]]
In Islamic tradition, cats are admired for their cleanliness. They are thought to be [[Islamic hygienical jurisprudence|ritually clean]], unlike [[dog]]s, and are thus allowed to enter homes<ref name=Campo/> and even [[mosque]]s, including [[Masjid al-Haram]]. Food sampled by cats is considered [[halal]] and water from which cats have drunk is permitted for [[wudu]].<ref name=Campo/>

[[Ulama|Muslim scholars]] are divided on the issue of [[neutering]] animals. Most, however, maintain that [[neutering]] cats is allowed "if there is some benefit in neutering the cat and if that will not cause its death".<ref name=Saed>{{cite book|title=Islam: Questions and Answers - Jurisprudence and Islamic Rulings: General and Transactions -, Part 1|author=Muhammad Saed Abdul-Rahman|publisher=MSA Publication Limited|year=2004|pages=323–325|isbn=1861794118|accessdate=2013-08-15}}</ref> [[Muhammad ibn al Uthaymeen]], a 20th-century [[Saudi Arabia]]n [[Sunni]] [[imam]], preached:

{{quote|If there are too many cats and they are a nuisance, and if the operation will not harm them, then there is nothing wrong with it, because this is better than killing them after they have been created. But if the cats are ordinary cats and are not causing a nuisance, perhaps it is better to leave them alone to reproduce.<ref name=Saed/>}}

== See also ==
*[[Cats in ancient Egypt]]
*[[Cats and humans]]
*[[Islam and animals]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{Cat nav}}

[[Category:Cats as pets]]
[[Category:Animals in religion]]
[[Category:Muslim views|Cats]]
[[Category:Islam and society|Cats]]

Real-time strategy

2015-03-26T17:16:46Z

89.76.8.142: /* Tournaments */

{{VG Strategy}}

'''Real-time strategy''' ('''RTS''') is a subgenre of [[strategy video game]]s which does not progress incrementally in [[turn-based game|turns]].<ref name=c>{{cite web |url=http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/ |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20110427052656/http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/ |archivedate=April 27, 2011 |title=A History of Real-Time Strategy Games |accessdate=March 31, 2008 |author=Bruce Geryk |publisher=GameSpot |quote=Early computer strategy games adhered firmly to the turn-based concepts of their board game ancestors, where—by necessity—players had time to plan their turns before their opponents had a chance to move. Real-time strategy changed all of that so that games would begin to more closely resemble reality: Time was limited, and if you wasted yours, your opponents would probably be taking advantage of theirs. }}</ref>

The term "Real-time strategy" appeared in ''BYTE'' magazine in 1982,{{r|sartoriangus198212}} but usually [[Brett Sperry]] is credited with coining the term to market ''[[Dune II]]''.<ref name=a>{{cite web |url=http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/ |title=A History of Real-Time Strategy Games |accessdate=March 31, 2008 |author=Bruce Geryk |publisher=GameSpot |quote=It wasn't until some time after the game was in development that I decided to call it "real-time strategy"--it seems obvious now, but there was a lot of back and forth between calling it a "real-time war game", "real-time war", "wargame", or "strategy game". I was deeply concerned that words like "strategy" and "wargame" would keep many players from even trying this completely new game dynamic. Before 1992, wargames and strategy games were very much niche markets—with the exception of Sid Meier's work—so my fears were justified. But in the end, it was best to call it an "RTS" because that is exactly what it was. }}</ref><ref name=b>{{cite web |url=http://archive.gamespy.com/top10/february04/rts |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20100616031405/http://archive.gamespy.com/top10/february04/rts |archivedate=June 16, 2010 | title=Top ten real-time strategy games of all time | publisher=GameSpy | quote=You can't really talk about the real-time strategy genre without giving a nod to Dune II, the title that kicked off the phenomena. | accessdate=December 2, 2008}}</ref>

In an RTS, as in other wargames, the participants position and maneuver units and structures under their control to secure areas of the map and/or destroy their opponents' assets. In a typical RTS, it is possible to create additional units and structures during the course of a game. This is generally limited by a requirement to [[Resource management|expend accumulated resources]]. These resources are in turn garnered by controlling special points on the map and/or possessing certain types of units and structures devoted to this purpose. More specifically, the typical game of the RTS genre features [[resource gathering]], base building, in-game technological development and indirect control of units.<ref name=bgeryk_gspot>{{cite web |last=Geryk |first=Bruce |title=A History of Real-Time Strategy Games |publisher=[[GameSpot]] |url=http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/ | accessdate=May 29, 2007}}</ref><ref name=ignstate/>

The tasks a player must perform to succeed at an RTS can be very demanding, and complex user interfaces have evolved to cope with the challenge. Some features have been borrowed from [[desktop environment]]s; for example, the technique of "clicking and dragging" to select all units under a given area.

Though some game genres share conceptual and gameplay similarities with the RTS template, recognized genres are generally not subsumed as RTS games.<ref name = ignstate>{{cite web |last=Adams |first=Dan |title=The State of the RTS |publisher=IGN |date=April 7, 2006 |url=http://pc.ign.com/articles/700/700747p1.html |accessdate=May 31, 2007}}</ref> For instance, [[city-building game]]s, [[construction and management simulation]]s, and games of the [[real-time tactics]] variety are generally not considered to be "real-time strategy".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/ |title=A History of Real-Time Strategy Games |accessdate=March 31, 2008 |author=Bruce Geryk |publisher=GameSpot |quote=Although games such as Populous and SimCity are certainly played in real time, these give rise to the "god game" genre, which includes such titles as the city-builder series from Impressions, Will Wright's innovative designs, and much of Peter Molyneux's work, including the upcoming Black & White. Games in this genre tend to appeal to their own fans, and while there definitely is an overlap between these two genres, gamers generally see them as distinct from one another.}}</ref>

==History==
{{See also|Chronology of real-time strategy games}}

===Precursors and early Genesis===
The genre that is recognized today as "real-time strategy" emerged as a result of an extended period of evolution and refinement. Games that are today sometimes perceived as ancestors of the real-time strategy genre were never marketed or designed as such at the original date of publication. As a result, designating "early real-time strategy" titles is problematic because such games are being held up to modern standards. The genre initially evolved separately in the United Kingdom, Japan, and North America, afterward gradually merging into a unified worldwide tradition.

[[Dani Bunten Berry]]'s (of ''[[M.U.L.E]]'' fame) ''[[Cytron Masters]]'' (1982), developed by [[Ozark Softscape]] and released by [[Strategic Simulations|SSI]], has been considered the earliest possible game of the genre.<ref name=matt_barton>{{cite web | url=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1706/the_history_of_computer_.php?page=3 | title=The History of Computer Role-playing Games|accessdate=December 7, 2010}}</ref><ref name=dani_memoirs>{{cite web | url=http://www.anticlockwise.com/dani/personal/biz/memoir.htm | archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20090312065934/http://anticlockwise.com/dani/personal/biz/memoir.htm | archivedate=March 12, 2009 | title=Game Design Memoir by Dani Bunten Berry|accessdate=June 7, 2007 }}</ref> ''[[BYTE]]'' in December 1982 published as an Apple II [[type-in program]] ''Cosmic Conquest''. The winner of the magazine's annual Game Contest, the author described it as a "single-player game of real-time action and strategic decision making". The magazine described it as "a real-time space strategy game". The game has elements of resource management and wargaming.<ref name="sartoriangus198212">{{cite news | url=http://archive.org/stream/byte-magazine-1982-12/1982_12_BYTE_07-12_Game_Plan_1982#page/n3/mode/2up | title=Cosmic Conquest | work=BYTE | date=December 1982 | accessdate=19 October 2013 | author=Sartori-Angus, Alan | pages=3,124}}</ref> Another 1982 example is ''[[Legionnaire (computer game)|Legionnaire]]'' on the [[Atari 8-bit family]], written by [[Chris Crawford (game designer)|Chris Crawford]] for [[Avalon Hill]]. This was effectively the opposite of ''Utopia'', in that it offered a complete real-time tactical combat system with variable terrain and mutual-help concepts, but lacked any resource collection and economy/production concepts. As a result, this game might be better considered an early forerunner of the real-time tactics, or RTT, genre.{{cn|date=January 2014}}

In the United Kingdom, the genre's roots can be traced to ''[[Stonkers]]'' by John Gibson, published in 1983 by [[Imagine Software]] for the [[ZX Spectrum]], and ''[[Nether Earth (game)|Nether Earth]]'' published on ZX Spectrum in 1987. In North America, the oldest game retrospectively classified as real-time strategy by several sources<ref name = ignstate/><ref name=rakrent>{{cite web | url=http://www.rakrent.com/rtsc/html/glist-hist.htm | title=RTSC Historical RTS List|accessdate=August 5, 2006 }}</ref> is ''[[The Ancient Art of War]]'' (1984), designed by [[Evryware]]'s Dave and Barry Murry, followed by the sequel ''[[The Ancient Art of War at Sea]]'' in 1987. Scott Sharkey of 1UP, however, considers ''Cytron Masters'' and other real-time examples prior to ''Herzog Zwei'' to be tactical rather than strategic, due to most lacking the ability to construct units or manage resources, and that the slower processors and modems "made for ticks so long that the games were practically turn based."<ref name=1UP-Duke/>

In Japan, the genre's roots can be traced to ''[[Bokosuka Wars]]'' (1983), an early [[Tactical role-playing game|strategy RPG]] (or "simulation RPG");<ref name=Nintendo>[http://www.nintendo.co.jp/wii/vc/vc_bw/index.html Bokosuka Wars] ([http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nintendo.co.jp%2Fwii%2Fvc%2Fvc_bw%2Findex.html translation]), [[Nintendo]]</ref> the game revolves around the player leading an army across a battlefield against enemy forces in real-time while recruiting/spawning soldiers along the way, for which it is considered by Ray Barnholt of [[1UP.com]] to be an early prototype real-time strategy game.<ref name=1UP-Druaga>[http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=1&cId=3135870 Dru Hill: The Chronicle of Druaga], [[1UP.com|1UP]]</ref> This led to several other games that combine [[Role-playing video game|role-playing]] and real-time strategy elements, such as the 1988 [[Kure Software Koubou]] computer strategy RPGs, ''[[First Queen]]''<ref name="kuresoft">{{cite web|title=Official Site|publisher=[[Kure Software Koubou]]|url=http://www.kuresoft.net|accessdate=May 19, 2011}} ([http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://www.kuresoft.net Translation])</ref> and ''[[Kure Software Koubou#Silver Ghost|Silver Ghost]]'', which featured an early example of a [[point-and-click]] interface, to control characters using a cursor.<ref>{{cite web|author=Kurt Kalata|date=February 4, 2010|title=So What the Heck is Silver Ghost|publisher=Hardcore Gaming 101|url=http://blog.hardcoregaming101.net/2010/02/so-what-heck-is-silver-ghost.html|accessdate=April 2, 2011}}</ref> Another early title with real-time strategy elements was [[Sega]]'s ''[[Gain Ground]]'' (1988), a strategy-[[action game]] that involved directing a set of troops across various enemy-filled levels.<ref>[http://uk.ps2.ign.com/articles/531/531748p1.html Sega Ages: Gain Ground], [[IGN]], July 20, 2004</ref><ref>[http://uk.retro.ign.com/articles/882/882363p1.html Top 10 Renovation Games], IGN, June 17, 2008</ref> [[TechnoSoft]]'s ''[[Herzog (video game)|Herzog]]'' (1988) is regarded as a precursor to the real-time strategy genre, being the predecessor to ''Herzog Zwei'' and somewhat similar in nature, though primitive in comparison.<ref>[http://classicgaming.gamespy.com/View.php?view=GameMuseum.Detail&id=242 Herzog Zwei], GameSpy</ref>

''[[Herzog Zwei]]'', released for the [[Mega Drive|Sega Mega Drive/Genesis]] [[home console]] in 1989, is the earliest example of a game with a feature set that falls under the contemporary definition of modern real-time strategy.<ref name=hzweifirstrts>{{cite web | url=http://gamespy-archives.quaddicted.com/sites/www.strategyplanet.com/features/articles/strategypeak/index.html | title=Are Real Time Strategy Games At Their Peak? | publisher=[[GameSpy]] | date=May 9, 2001 | accessdate=December 14, 2014 }}</ref><ref name=zzap>Zzap! Issue 68, December 1990, p.45 – {{cite web | url=http://www.classicgaming.com/amigareviews/battlema.htm | archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20091007024551/http://www.classicgaming.com/amigareviews/battlema.htm | archivedate=October 7, 2009 | title=Amiga Reviews: Battlemaster | accessdate=December 17, 2006}}</ref> The game combined traditional strategy gameplay with fully real-time, fast-paced, [[Arcade game|arcade]]-style [[action game]]play,<ref name="Sega-16">[http://www.sega-16.com/2005/07/herzog-zwei/ Herzog Zwei], Sega-16 Review by Daniel Thomas (2004)</ref><ref name="cvg_zwei">{{cite journal|last=Glancey|first=Paul|title=Mean Machines: Herzog Zwei|journal=[[Computer and Video Games]]|date=April 1990|issue=101|url=http://amr.abime.net/review_27759|accessdate=4 February 2012|page=103}}</ref><ref name="gamesmachine_zwei">{{cite journal|last=Lapworth|first=Warren|title=Herzog Zwei|journal=[[The Games Machine]]|date=March 1990|issue=28|url=http://amr.abime.net/review_23961|accessdate=4 February 2012|page=50}}</ref> featuring a [[Split screen (computer graphics)|split-screen]] [[Multiplayer video game|two-player]] mode where both players are in action simultaneously and there are no pauses while decisions are taken, forcing players to think quickly while on the move.<ref name="cvg_zwei"/> In ''Herzog Zwei'', though the player only controls one unit, the manner of control foreshadowed the point-and-click mechanic of later games. It introduced much of the genre conventions, including unit construction and resource management, with the control and destruction of bases being an important aspect of the game, as were the economic/production aspects of those bases.<ref name=1UP-Duke>{{cite web|url=http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3134179|title=Hail to the Duke|author=Scott Sharkey|publisher=1UP.com|accessdate=March 1, 2011}}</ref> The game has been credited as a key influence on the creation of ''Dune II''.<ref name="origin_rts">{{cite web|last=Clarke-Willson|first=Stephen|title=The Origin of Realtime Strategy Games on the PC|url=http://www.above-the-garage.com/blog/1998/8/18/the-origin-of-realtime-strategy-games-on-the-pc|work=The Rise and Fall of Virgin Interactive|publisher=Above the Garage Productions|accessdate=30 January 2012|authorlink=Stephen Clarke-Willson|date=August 18, 1998|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20030504034920/http://www.above-the-garage.com/rblts/vie16b.htm|archivedate=2014-12-14}}</ref><ref name="Edge 2008">{{cite web|title=The Making of... Dune II|url=http://www.edge-online.com/features/the-making-of-dune-ii/|work=''[[Edge (magazine)|Edge]]''|publisher=Next-Gen.biz|accessdate=July 27, 2011|date=December 9, 2008|quote=''Herzog Zwei was a lot of fun, but I have to say the other inspiration for Dune II was the Mac software interface. The whole design/interface dynamics of mouse clicking and selecting desktop items got me thinking, ‘Why not allow the same inside the game environment? Why not a context-sensitive playfield? To hell with all these hot keys, to hell with keyboard as the primary means of manipulating the game!''}}</ref>

Notable as well are early games like ''[[Mega Lo Mania]]'' by [[Sensible Software]] (1991) and ''[[Overlord (1990 computer game)|Supremacy]]'' (also called ''Overlord'' – 1990). Although these two lacked direct control of military units, they both offered considerable control of resource management and economic systems. In addition, ''Mega Lo Mania'' has advanced [[technology tree]]s that determine offensive and defensive prowess. Another early (1988) game, ''[[Carrier Command]]'' by [[Realtime Games Software|Realtime Games]], involved real-time responses to events in the game, requiring management of resources and control of vehicles. The early game ''[[Sim Ant]]'' by [[Maxis]] (1991) had resource gathering, and controlling an attacking army by having them follow a lead unit. However, it was with the release of ''Dune II'' from [[Westwood Studios]] (1992) that real-time strategy became recognized as a distinct genre of video games.<ref name="bgeryk_gspot"/>

===1992–1998: seminal titles===

Although real-time strategy games have an extensive history, some titles have served to define the popular perception of the genre and expectations of real-time strategy titles more than others,<ref name=bgeryk_gspot/> in particular the games released between 1992 and 1998 by [[Westwood Studios]] and [[Blizzard Entertainment]].

Westwood's ''[[Dune II|Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty]]'' (1992) featured all the core concepts and mechanics of modern real-time strategy games that are still used today,<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3134179 | title=The Essential 50 Part 31: Herzog Zwei | accessdate=December 17, 2006}}</ref><ref name=gspystrategy1>{{cite web | last =Walker | first =Mark | title =Strategy Gaming: Part I – A Primer | publisher =GameSpy | url =http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategy1/ | archiveurl =http://web.archive.org/web/20110525143149/http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategy1/ | archivedate =May 25, 2011 | accessdate=October 28, 2007}}</ref> such as using the mouse to move units, and gathering resources,<ref name=ignstate/> and as such served as the prototype for later real-time strategy games. According to its co-designer and lead programmer, Joe Bostic, a "benefit over ''Herzog Zwei'' is that we had the advantage of a mouse and keyboard. This greatly facilitated precise player control, which enabled the player to give orders to individual units. The mouse, and the direct control it allowed, was critical in making the RTS genre possible.”<ref>{{cite web|title=The History of Command & Conquer|url=http://www.nowgamer.com/features/894724/the_history_of_command_conquer.html|work=NowGamer|accessdate=May 14, 2014}}</ref><ref name="Edge 2008"/>

The success of ''Dune II'' encouraged several games which became influential in their own right.<ref name=ignstate/><ref name=gspystrategy1/>'' [[Warcraft: Orcs & Humans]]'' (1994) achieved great prominence upon its release, owing in part to its use of a fantasy setting and also to its depiction of a wide variety of buildings (such as farms) which approximated a full fictitious society, not just a military force.{{Citation needed|date=July 2011}} ''[[Command & Conquer (1995 video game)|Command & Conquer]]'', as well as ''[[Command and Conquer: Red Alert]]'', became the most popular early RTS games. These two games contended with ''[[Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness]]'' after its release in late 1995.

''[[Total Annihilation]]'', released by [[Cavedog Entertainment]] in 1997, introduced 3D units and terrain and focused on huge battles that emphasized macromanagement over micromanagement. It featured a streamlined interface that would influence many RTS games in later years. ''[[Age of Empires (video game)|Age of Empires]]'', released by [[Ensemble Studios]] in 1997 tried to put a game in a slower pace, combining elements of ''[[Civilization (computer game)|Civilization]]'' with the real-time strategy concept by introducing ages of technologies. In 1998, Blizzard released the game ''[[StarCraft]]'', which became an international phenomenon and is still played in large professional leagues to this day. Collectively, all of these games defined the genre, providing the ''de facto'' benchmark against which new real-time strategy games are measured.

===Refinement and transition to 3D===
The real-time strategy genre has been relatively stable since 1995. Additions to the genre's concept in newer games tend to emphasize more of the basic RTS elements (higher unit caps, more unit types, larger maps, etc.). Rather than innovations to the game concept, new games generally focus on refining aspects of successful predecessors.{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}} As the paragon example of gameplay refinement, Cavedog's acclaimed ''Total Annihilation'' from 1997 distilled the core mechanics of ''Command & Conquer'', and introduced the first 3D units and terrain in real-time strategy games. The Age of Empires idea was refined further by [[Stainless Steel Studios]]' ''[[Empire Earth (video game)|Empire Earth]]'' in 2001. [[GSC Game World|GSC Game World's]] ''[[Cossacks: European Wars]]'' series took the genre in a different direction, bringing population caps into the tens of thousands.

''[[Dungeon Keeper]]'' (1997), ''[[Populous: The Beginning]]'' (1998), ''[[Jeff Wayne's The War of the Worlds (1998 video game)|Jeff Wayne's The War of the Worlds]]'' (1998), ''[[Homeworld]]'' (1999), and ''[[Dark Reign 2]]'' (2000) were among the first completely 3D real-time strategy titles. ''Homeworld'' was notable in that it featured a 3D environment in space, therefore allowing movement in every direction,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gamereplays.org/portals.php?show=page&name=the_history_of_real_time_strategy_pt3_2|title=The History of Real Time Strategy, Part 3.2: Polygons and Pixels, continued|author=TDA|date=June 6, 2008|accessdate=March 23, 2011|quote=''Homeworld was the first fully three-dimensional RTS game to be released.''|publisher=gamereplays.org}}</ref> a feature which its semi-sequel, ''[[Homeworld Cataclysm]]'' (2000) continued to build upon adding features such as waypoints. ''[[Homeworld 2]]'', released in 2003, streamlined movement in the 360° 3D environment. Furthermore, ''[[Machines (video game)|Machines]]'', which was also released in 1999 and featured a nearly 100% 3D environment, attempted to combine the RTS genre with a first-person shooter (FPS) genre although it was not a particularly successful title. These games were followed by a short period of interest in experimental strategy games such as ''[[Allegiance (computer game)|Allegiance]]'' (2000). ''Jeff Wayne's The War of the Worlds'' was notable for being one of the few completely non-linear RTS games ever.

It is only in approximately 2002 that 3D real-time strategy became the standard, with both ''[[Warcraft III]]'' (2002) and Ensemble Studio's ''[[Age of Mythology]]'' (2002) being built on a full 3D game engine. ''[[Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns]]'' introduced classic [[Wargame (video games)|wargame]] elements, such as [[supply lines]] to the genre. ''[[Battle Realms]]'' (2001) was another full 3D game, but had limited camera views.

The move from 2D to 3D has been criticized in some cases. Issues with controlling the camera and placement of objects have been cited as problems.<ref name=splanetsacrifice>{{cite web | title =Sacrifice | publisher =StrategyPlanet | date =December 6, 2000 | url =http://www.strategyplanet.com/features/demos/sacrificedemo/ | accessdate=November 19, 2007}}</ref><ref name=gameindustry>{{cite web |last=Hargosh |first=Todd |title=Emperor's Spice Flows Strong |publisher=Game Industry News |url=http://www.gameindustry.com/review/item.asp?id=355 |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20080226225151/http://www.gameindustry.com/review/item.asp?id=355 |archivedate=February 26, 2008 |accessdate=November 19, 2007}}</ref><ref name=ttgamer>{{cite web | title =Age of Empires 3 PC Review | publisher =TTGamer | url =http://www.tweaktown.com/gaming/2399/age_of_empires_3_pc_review/index.html | accessdate=November 19, 2007}}</ref>

Relatively few genres have emerged from or in competition with real-time strategy games, although real-time tactics, a superficially similar genre, emerged around 1995. In 1998, [[Activision]] attempted to combine the real-time strategy and [[first-person shooter]] genres in ''[[Battlezone (1998 video game)|Battlezone]]'', while in 2002 [[Rage Games Limited]] attempted this with the ''[[Hostile Waters (game)|Hostile Waters]]'' games, and [[Natural Selection (video game)|''Natural Selection'']], a game modification based on the Half-Life engine. [[Savage: The Battle for Newerth]] combined the RPG and RTS elements in an online game.

===Specialization and evolution===
A few games have experimented with diversifying map design, which continues to be largely two-dimensional even in 3D engines. ''[[Earth 2150]]'' allowed units to tunnel underground, effectively creating a dual-layer map; three-layer (orbit-surface-underground) maps were introduced in ''[[Metal Fatigue (video game)|Metal Fatigue]]''. In addition, units could even be transported to entirely separate maps, with each map having its own window in the user interface. ''[[Three Kingdoms: Fate of the Dragon]]'' (2001) offered a simpler model: the main map contains locations that expand into their own maps. In these examples, however, gameplay was essentially identical regardless of the map layer in question. ''[[Dungeons & Dragons: Dragonshard|Dragonshard]]'' (2005) emphasized its dual-layer maps by placing one of the game's two main resources in each map, making exploration and control of both maps fundamentally valuable.

Some games, borrowing from the real-time tactics (RTT) template, have moved toward an increased focus on tactics while downplaying traditional resource management, in which designated units collect the resources used for producing further units or buildings. Titles like ''[[Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War]]'' (2004), ''[[Star Wars: Empire at War]]'' (2006), and ''[[Company of Heroes]]'' (2006) replace the traditional resource gathering model with a strategic control-point system, in which control over strategic points yields construction/reinforcement points. ''[[Ground Control (video game)|Ground Control]]'' was the first such game to replace individual units with "squads".

Others are moving away from the traditional real-time strategy game model with the addition of other genre elements. One example is ''[[Sins of a Solar Empire]]'', released by [[Ironclad Games]], which mixes elements of grand-scale stellar empire building games like ''[[Master of Orion]]'' with real-time strategy elements. Another example is indie game ''[[Achron]]'', which incorporates time travel as a game mechanic, allowing a player to send units forward or backward in time.<ref>{{cite news | newspaper=[[Spiegel Online]] | last=Fahrenbach | first=Achim | title =Dancing on the timeline | language=German | url=http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/games/0,1518,690063,00.html | date=April 25, 2010 | accessdate=August 30, 2011}}</ref>

==Gameplay==
In a typical real-time strategy game, the screen is divided into a map area displaying the game world and terrain, units, and buildings, and an interface overlay containing command and production controls and often a "radar" or "minimap" overview of the entire map.<ref>[http://www.nassaulibrary.org/centreblog/starcraft.png Starcraft in-game image]</ref><ref>[http://i.d.com.com/i/dl/media/dlimage/89/25/1/89251_large.jpeg Command & Conquer in-game image]</ref> The player is usually given an [[Isometry|isometric]] perspective of the world, or a free-roaming camera from an [[Bird's-eye view|aerial viewpoint]] for modern 3D games.<ref name="fundamentals">{{cite book|last=Rollings|first=Andrew|author2=Ernest Adams |title=Fundamentals of Game Design|publisher=Prentice Hall|year=2006|location=|url=http://wps.prenhall.com/bp_gamedev_1/54/14053/3597646.cw/index.html}}</ref> Players mainly [[Scrolling|scroll]] the screen and issue commands with the mouse, and may also use keyboard shortcuts.

In most real-time strategy games, especially the earliest ones, the gameplay is generally fast-paced and requires very quick reflexes. For this reason, the amount of violence in some games makes RTS games close to action games in terms of gameplay.

Gameplay generally consists of the player being positioned somewhere in the map with a few units or a building that is capable of building other units/buildings. Often, but not always, the player must build specific structures to unlock more advanced units in the [[tech tree]]. Often, but not always, RTS games require the player to build an army (ranging from small squads of no more than 2 units, to literally hundreds of units) and using them to either defend themselves from a virtual form of [[Human wave attack]] or to eliminate enemies who possess bases with unit production capacities of their own. Occasionally, RTS games will have a preset number of units for the player to control and do not allow building of additional ones.

Resource gathering is commonly the main focus of the RTS games, but other titles of the genre place higher gameplay significance to the how units are used in combat, the extreme example of which are games of the [[real-time tactical]] genre. Some titles impose a ceiling on the number simultaneous troops, which becomes a key gameplay consideration, a significant example being ''StarCraft'', while other titles have no such unit cap.

===Micromanagement and macromanagement===
{{Main|Micromanagement (computer gaming)|Macromanagement (computer gaming)}}

Micromanagement refers to when a player's attention is directed more toward the management and maintenance of his or her own individual units and resources. This creates an atmosphere in which the interaction of the player is constantly needed. On the other hand, [[macromanagement]] refers to when a player's focus is directed more toward economic development and large-scale strategic maneuvering, allowing time to think and consider possible solutions. Micromanagement frequently involves the use of combat tactics. Macromanagement tends to look to the future of the game whereas Micromanagement tends to the present.

===Criticism of gameplay===
Because of their generally faster-paced nature (and in some cases a smaller learning curve), real-time strategy games have surpassed the popularity of [[turn-based strategy]] computer games.<ref name=gspytbsrts>{{cite web | last =Walker | first =Mark | title =Strategy Gaming: Part V – Real-Time vs. Turn-Based | publisher =GameSpy | url =http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategygames05/ | archiveurl =http://web.archive.org/web/20081221074049/http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategygames05/ | archivedate =December 21, 2008 | accessdate=October 28, 2007}}</ref> In the past, a common criticism was to regard real-time strategy games as "cheap imitations" of turn-based strategy games, arguing that real-time strategy games had a tendency to devolve into "click-fests"<ref name=armchair>{{cite web |title=Theatre of War by 1C and Battlefront – Interview |publisher=Armchair General Magazine |url=http://www.armchairgeneral.com/articles.php?cat=59&p=2806&page=1 | accessdate=June 2, 2007}}</ref><ref name=pcp>{{cite web | title =Point – CounterPoint: Turn Based vs. Real Time Strategy | publisher =[[Strategy Planet]] | date =June 27, 2001 | url =http://www.strategyplanet.com/features/articles/pcp-turnvsreal/ | accessdate=April 5, 2007}}</ref><ref name=gspystrategy2>{{cite web | last =Walker | first =Mark | title =Strategy Gaming: Part II | publisher =GameSpy | url =http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategy02/ | archiveurl =http://web.archive.org/web/20100105182651/http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategy02/ | archivedate =January 5, 2010 | accessdate=October 28, 2007}}</ref> in which the player who was faster with the [[computer mouse|mouse]] generally won, because they could give orders to their units at a faster rate. The common retort is that success involves not just fast clicking, but also the ability to make sound decisions under time pressure.<ref name=pcp/> The "clickfest" argument is also often voiced alongside a "button babysitting" criticism, which pointed out that a great deal of game time is spent either waiting and watching for the next time a production button could be clicked, or rapidly alternating between different units and buildings, clicking their respective button.<ref name="babysitting">This mostly a concern with older RTS games that did not feature building queues, meaning that players would have to click the button to build a unit soon after it was completed. However, in some games where units have timed abilities that must be explicitly activated, for instance heroes in the real-time tactics game [[Mark of Chaos]] this is still a concern.</ref>

A third common criticism{{who|date=June 2012}} is that real-time gameplay often degenerates into "[[rush (video gaming)|rushes]]" where the players try to gain the advantage and subsequently defeat the opponent as quickly in the game as possible, preferably before the opposition is capable of successfully reacting.<ref name=ign_scvsdow>{{cite web | title =StarCraft vs Dawn of War | publisher =IGN | date =August 6, 2004 | url =http://pc.ign.com/articles/533/533146p1.html | archiveurl =http://web.archive.org/web/20090414092309/http://pc.ign.com/articles/533/533146p1.html | archivedate =April 14, 2009 | accessdate =December 1, 2007 }}</ref> For example, the original ''[[Command & Conquer]]'' gave birth to the now-common "tank rush" tactic, where the game outcome is often decided very early on by one player gaining an initial advantage in resources and producing large amounts of a relatively powerful but still quite cheap unit—which is thrown at the opposition before they have had time to establish defenses or production. Although this strategy has been criticized for encouraging overwhelming force over strategy and tactics, defenders of the strategy argue that they're simply taking advantage of the strategies utilized, and some argue that it is a realistic representation of warfare. One of the most infamous versions of a rush is the "Zergling rush" from the real-time strategy game ''[[StarCraft]]''; in fact, the term "zerging" has become synonymous with rushing.<ref name=bgeryk_gspot/>

A fourth criticism of the RTS genre is the importance of skill over strategy in real-time strategy games. The manual dexterity and ability to multitask and divide one's attention is often considered the most important aspect to succeeding at the RTS genre. According to Troy Dunniway, former Westwood developer who has also worked on ''[[Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars]]'', "A player controls hundreds of units, dozens of buildings and many different events that are all happening simultaneously. There is only one player, and he can only pay attention to one thing at a time. Expert players can quickly flip between many different tasks, while casual gamers have more problems with this."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dunniwaydesign.com/rts_design.htm |title=RTS Design |work=Aspects of real-time strategy |date=September 2007 |accessdate=September 13, 2007}}</ref>

====Tactics vs. strategy====
{{See also|Real-time tactics#Genre classification}}
Real-time strategy games have been criticized for an overabundance of tactical considerations when compared to the amount of strategic gameplay found in such games. According to [[Chris Taylor (game designer)|Chris Taylor]], lead designer of ''[[Supreme Commander (game)|Supreme Commander]]'', he said, "[My first attempt at visualizing RTSs in a fresh and interesting new way] was my realizing that although we call this genre 'Real-Time Strategy,' it should have been called 'Real-Time Tactics' with a dash of strategy thrown in."<ref name=christaylor>{{cite web | last =Keefer | first =John | title =Supreme Commander Interview (PC) | publisher =GameSpy | date =July 8, 2005 | url =http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/supreme-commander/631678p1.html | accessdate=November 4, 2007}}</ref> (Taylor then posits his own game as having surpassed this mold by including additional elements of broader strategic scope.)<ref name=christaylor/>

In general terms, [[military strategy]] refers to the use of a broad arsenal of weapons including diplomatic, informational, military, and economic resources, whereas [[military tactics]] is more concerned with short-term goals such as winning an individual battle.<ref name=gspytbsrts/> In the context of strategy video games, however, the difference is often reduced to the more limited criteria of either a presence or absence of base building and unit production.

In an article for [[Gamasutra]], Nathan Toronto criticizes real-time strategy games for too often having only one valid means of victory — [[attrition warfare|attrition]] — comparing them unfavorably to real-time tactics games. Players' awareness that the only way for them to win or lose is militarily makes them unlikely to respond to gestures of diplomacy. The result is that the winner of a real-time strategy game is too often the best tactician rather than the best strategist.<ref name="gama_toronto">{{cite web | last = Toronto | first = Nathan | title = The Future Of The Real-Time Strategy Game | publisher = [[Gamasutra]] | date = January 24, 2008 | url = http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3515/the_future_of_the_realtime_.php | accessdate = February 2, 2010}}</ref> Troy Goodfellow counters this by saying that the problem is not that real-time strategy games are lacking in strategy (he says attrition is a form of strategy), rather it is that they too often have the ''same'' strategy: produce faster than you consume. He also states that building and managing armies is the conventional definition of real-time strategy, and that it is unfair to make comparisons with other genres.<ref name="gama_goodfellow">{{cite web | last = Goodfellow | first = Troy | title = The Future Of The RTS – A Counter-Opinion | publisher = Gamasutra | date = January 28, 2008 | url = http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17098 | accessdate = February 2, 2010}}</ref>

In an article for [[Gamespy]], Mark Walker criticizes real-time strategy games for their ''lack'' of combat tactics, suggesting real-time tactics games as a more suitable substitute.<ref name=gspytbsrts>{{cite web | last =Walker | first =Mark | title =Strategy Gaming: Part V – Real-Time vs. Turn-Based | publisher =GameSpy | url =http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/strategygames05/ |date = February 2002| accessdate=October 28, 2007}}</ref> He also says that developers need to begin looking outside the genre for new ideas in order for strategy games to continue to be successful in the future.<ref name=gspytbsrts_pvi>{{cite web | last =Walker | first =Mark | title =Strategy Gaming: Part VI – Where the Genre is Headed | publisher =GameSpy | url =http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/stratfinal/ | archiveurl =http://web.archive.org/web/20071030014041/http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/stratfinal/ | archivedate =October 30, 2007 |date = February 2002| accessdate=February 13, 2010}}</ref>

====Turn-based vs. real-time====
{{Main|Time-keeping systems in games}}
A debate has emerged between fans of real-time strategy and turn-based strategy (and related genres) based on the merits of the real-time and turn-based systems. Some titles attempt to merge the two systems: for example, the role-playing game ''[[Fallout (video game)|Fallout]]'' uses turn-based combat and real-time gameplay, while the real-time strategy games ''Homeworld'', ''[[Rise of Nations]]'', and the games of the ''[[Total War (series)|Total War]]'' series allow the player to pause the game and issue orders. Additionally, the ''Total War'' series has a combination of a turn-based strategy map with a real-time battle map.
Another example of a game combining both turn-based game and real-time-strategy is ''[[The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-Earth II]]'' which allows players, in a 'War of the Ring' game, to play a turn-based strategy game, but also battle each other in real time.

====Real-time strategy games on the consoles====
Despite ''[[Herzog Zwei]]'', a [[console game]], laying the foundations for the real-time strategy genre, RTS games never gained popularity on consoles like they did on the [[Personal computer|PC]] platform.<ref name=1UP-Duke/> Real-time strategy games made for [[video game console]]s have been consistently criticized due to their control schemes, as the PC's keyboard and mouse are generally considered to be superior to a console's [[gamepad]] for the genre. RTS games for [[home console]]s have thus generally met with mixed success.<ref name="CNETLOTR">{{cite web
| last =Ocampo
| first =Jason
| title =The Lord of the Rings, The Battle for Middle-earth II (Xbox 360)
| publisher =CNET
| date = July 7, 2006
| url =http://reviews.cnet.com/xbox-360-games/the-lord-of-the/4505-11457_7-31676469.html
| accessdate=November 4, 2007
}}</ref> A major reason for this lack of success on consoles is because of the interface for most RTS games being better suited for the PC's keyboard and mouse than the console's gamepad. Scott Sharkey of [[1UP.com|1UP]] notes that ''Herzog Zwei'' had already "offered a nearly perfect solution to the problem by giving the player direct control of a single powerful unit and near autonomy for everything else," and is surprised "that more console RTS games aren't designed with this kind of interface in mind from the ground up, rather than imitating" PC control schemes "that just don't work very well with a controller."<ref name=1UP-Duke/>

However, ''[[Halo Wars]]'', which was released in 2009 for the [[Xbox 360]], generated generally positive reviews, achieved an 82% critic average on aggregate web sites, and sold over 1 million copies.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/halowars
|title=Halo Wars (xbox360: 2009) Reviews
|publisher=[[Metacritic]]
|accessdate=March 6, 2009
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.gamerankings.com/xbox360/935835-halo-wars/index.html
|title=Halo Wars for Xbox 360
|publisher=[[Game Rankings]]
|accessdate=March 6, 2009
}}</ref>
According to [[IGN]], the gameplay lacks the traditional RTS concepts of limited resources and resource gathering and lacks multiple buildings.<ref>{{cite web
|author=Geddes, Ryan
|date=February 20, 2009
|url=http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/955/955576p1.html
|title=Halo Wars Review; Ensemble takes Halo, and real-time strategy, to a whole new planet
|publisher=IGN
|accessdate=March 6, 2009
}}</ref>

==Graphics==
''Total Annihilation'' (1997) was the first real-time strategy game to utilize true 3D units, terrain, and physics in both rendering and in gameplay. For instance, the missiles in ''Total Annihilation'' travel in real time in simulated 3D space, and they can miss their target by passing over or under it. Similarly, missile-armed units in ''Earth 2150'' are at a serious disadvantage when the opponent is on high ground because the missiles often hit the cliffside, even in the case when the attacker is a missile-armed helicopter. ''Homeworld'', ''[[Warzone 2100]] and [[Machines (video game)|Machines]]'' (all released in 1999) advanced the use of fully 3D environments in real-time strategy titles. In the case of ''[[Homeworld]]'', the game is set in space, offering a uniquely exploitable 3D environment in which all units can move vertically in addition to the horizontal plane. However, the near-industry-wide switch to full 3D was very gradual and most real-time strategy titles, including the first sequels to ''[[Command & Conquer (series)|Command & Conquer]]'', initially used isometric 3D graphics made by pre-rendered 3D tiles. Only in later years did these games begin to use true 3D graphics and game-play, making it possible to rotate the view of the battlefield in real-time. ''[[TA Spring|Spring]]'' is a good example of the transformation from semi-3D to full-3D game simulations. It is an ''[[open-source]]'' project which aims to give a ''Total Annihilation'' game-play experience in three dimensions. The most ambitious use of full 3D graphics was realized in ''[[Supreme Commander (video game)|Supreme Commander]]'', where all projectiles, units and terrain were simulated in real time, taking full advantage of the UI's zoom feature, which allowed cartographic style navigation of the 3D environment. This led to a number of unique gameplay elements, which were mostly obscured by the lack of computing power available in 2007, at the release date.

Japanese game developers [[Nippon Ichi]] and [[Vanillaware]] worked together on ''[[Grim Grimoire]]'', a [[PlayStation 2]] title released in 2007, which features hand-drawn animated 2D graphics.

From 2010, real-time strategy games more commonly incorporated [[physics engines]], such as [[Havok (software)|Havok]], in order to increase realism experienced in gameplay. A modern real-time strategy game that uses a physics engine is Ensemble Studios' ''[[Age of Empires III]]'', released on October 18, 2005,<ref name=firstphysics>{{cite web |url=http://www.havok.com/content/view/188/53/ |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20090430152148/http://www.havok.com/content/view/188/53/ |archivedate=April 30, 2009 |title=Havok Enables Age of Empires III |date=October 18, 2005 |work=Havok announces the use of the Havok Game Dynamics SDK in ''Age of Empires III''}}</ref> which used the [[Havok Game Dynamics SDK]] to power its real-time physics. ''Company of Heroes'' is another real-time strategy game that uses realistically modeled physics as a part of gameplay, including fully destructible environments.<ref>{{cite web |last=Burnes |first=Andrew |title=Company of Heroes Review |url=http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/reviews/4043/Company-of-Heroes-Review |date=September 11, 2006 |accessdate=January 24, 2011 |publisher=IGN}}</ref>

==Tournaments==
{{main|Electronic sports}}

RTS World tournaments have been held for both [[StarCraft]], and ''[[Warcraft III]]'' since its release in 1998, and 2002.
The games being that successful, that some players of ''[[Warcraft III]]'' playing ''[[Warcraft III professional competition]]'' have earned over $200,000 at the ''[[Warcraft III World Championships]]''.
In addition, hundreds of [[StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty|StarCraft II]] tournaments are held yearly, as it is becoming an increasingly popular branch of [[e-sports]]. Notable tournaments include [[Major League Gaming|MLG]], [[GOMTV Global StarCraft II League|GSL]], and [[Dreamhack]]. RTS tournaments are especially popular in [[South Korea]].

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}

==Further reading==
*{{cite journal|author=Chambers, C., Feng, W., Feng, W., and Saha, D.|year=2005|title=Mitigating information exposure to cheaters in real-time strategy games|journal=Proceedings of the international Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video|publisher=ACM|location=New York|pages=7–12|doi=10.1145/1065983.1065986|isbn=1-58113-987-X}}
*{{cite journal|first=Mark|last=Claypool|title=The effect of latency on user performance in Real-Time Strategy games|publisher=Computer Networks|volume=49|issue=1|date=September 15, 2005|pages=52–70|doi=10.1016/j.comnet.2005.04.008 | journal = Computer Networks}}
*{{cite journal|author=Cheng, D., Thawonmas, R.|title=Case-based plan recognition for real-time strategy games|date=November 2004|journal=Proc. of the 5th Game-On International Conference|pages=36–40|url=http://www.ice.ci.ritsumei.ac.jp/~ruck/PAP/cgaide04-1.pdf|format=PDF}}
*{{cite journal|author=Aha, D., Molineaux, M., Ponsen, M.|title=Learning to Win: Case-Based Plan Selection in a Real-Time Strategy Game|publisher=Springer Berlin / Heidelberg|journal=Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development|doi=10.1007/11536406|pages=5–20|date=September 7, 2005 | volume = 3620|editor1-last=Muñoz-Ávila|editor1-first=HéCtor|editor2-last=Ricci|editor2-first=Francesco|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|isbn=978-3-540-28174-0}}
*{{cite journal|author=Chan, H.; Fern, A.; Ray, S.; Wilson, N.; and Ventura, C.|year=2007|title=Online planning for resource production in real-time strategy games|journal=Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling|url=http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~afern/papers/icaps07-rts.pdf|format=PDF}}

{{Video game genre}}
{{Real-time strategy gameplay}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=February 2013}}

[[Category:Real-time strategy video games| ]]
[[Category:Video game genres]]
[[Category:Video game terminology]]

User talk:89.76.8.142

2015-02-04T02:29:22Z

89.76.8.142: ←Blanked the page

User talk:Andy Dingley

2015-02-04T02:23:40Z

89.76.8.142: arbitration committee request concerning deletionism in article "polandball"

{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{archive-nav}}
|maxarchivesize = 270K
|counter = 5
|algo = old(28d)
|archive = User talk:Andy Dingley/Archive %(year)d
}}

{{TOCright}}
<div style="float: right; clear: right; margin: 0 0 2em 3em; padding: 0.6em 1.2em; width: 14em; border: thin solid #cacaca;" >

=== Archives ===
: [[/2007]]{{*}}
: [[/2008 1 - 3]]
: [[/Archive 4]]
: [[/Archive 2009 January]]
: [[/Archive 2009 February]]
: [[/Archive 2009 March]]
: [[/Archive 2009 April]]
: [[/Archive 2009 May]]
: [[/Archive 2009 June]]
: [[/Archive 2009 July]]
: [[/Archive 2009 September]]
: [[/Archive 2009 October]]
: [[/Archive 2009 November]]
: [[/Archive 2009 December]]
: [[/Archive 2010 January]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 February]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 March]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 April]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 May]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 June]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 July]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 August]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 September]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 October]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 November]]
:: [[/Archive 2010 December]]
: [[/Archive 2011 January]]
:: [[/Archive 2011 February]]
:: [[/Archive 2011 March]]
:: [[/Archive 2011 April]]
:: [[/Archive 2011 May]]
:: [[/Archive 2011 June]]
: [[/Archive 2011]]
: [[/Archive 2012]]
: [[/Archive 2013]]
: [[/Archive 2014]]
</div>

==Your recent deletions on the Polandball article==
Maybe you could actually take care of the guy who is deleting stuff from wikipedia, instead of reverting my legit edits?
Or do I have to login on my account every time and have a 5 page "legal war" that ends up at the arbitration committee, since nowadays thinks that if they have an account, they can delete any contribution done by an IP address, since apparently an IP address is a "no one" who has no edits and cannot do nothing?
Ok - if we are supposed to have this edit on the website put via the hard way - please call the arbitration committee, since they need to review this case.

== Magnalium ==
Mr. Dingley,
I'm sorry about the change. It happened quite by mistake. I was using my dad's laptop to do a bit of studies and I saw the 'EDIT' button and thought I should check it out.... and one thing led to another and by the time I knew what I had done, I did'nt know how to repair it so just left it the way it was.

I am extremely sorry. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/120.61.90.232|120.61.90.232]] ([[User talk:120.61.90.232|talk]]) 13:59, 10 January 2015 (UTC) 
: No problem, we've got to start learning somewhere. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 16:35, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

== MotorPrinter links removed ==
Hello Mr. Dingley: Sorry for your concern regarding my recent entry for 3d Printing of electric motors and generators. I was only following the United Technologies example. However, after your comment, I understand the conflict. Instead, I would like to put the following into the section, "MotorPrinter is being used to manufacture the only brushless wound-rotor [synchronous] doubly-fed electric machine system known as Synchro-Sym to provide a range of electric motor and generator systems without RE-PM and with cost performance as never before seen" of course with links to "motorprinter", wound rotor doubly fed [Wikipedia], etc.

Is this okay? I am new to at least responding to users, so your response will let me know that I am doing at least this correctly.

Best Regards, Fred Klatt

== Dust Collector links removed ==
Hello Andy,
could you please explain me which point of the external links guideline violated the links I added?
thank you
[[User:fgkh|fgkh]] — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 22:17, 12 June 2014 (UTC).  

: Please read [[WP:EL]] and [[WP:NOTDIR]].
: This is an encyclopedia, not a directory. The purpose is to write self-contained articles, not to link onwards. We should only link onwards to resources that really do add something to an article that can't be achieved otherwise. None of the ELs you added (All very obviously from your own "fgkh" site) met this. Apart from being barely trivial JavaScript calculator up from the usual blog post spam, yours land on a page with a large empty box labelled "There is supposed to be an advert here, but we haven't even got that much working yet". [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 22:22, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

== [[Kane Is Able, Inc.]]==
Hi Andy, I'm the Marketing Intern from Kane Is Able and was authorized to update the wikipedia page with information from our website. I was wondering if you could further explain why all of my edits were deleted and now that page is being removed totally?
Thanks for your help. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Colleen.carter|Colleen.carter]] ([[User talk:Colleen.carter|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Colleen.carter|contribs]]) 15:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC) 

: I suggest asking this at [[Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions]]
: Beforehand, please read [[WP:COI]] and [[WP:GNG]], maybe raise it through [[WP:BUSINESS]] and its [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Business|Talk: page]]. If you want to raise this for discussion via [[WP:AFD]] (slow discussion of notability and possible deletion), just remove my [[WP:PROD]]. Sorry for the alphabet soup, but it's how things work round here. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
::I got a tin of [[alphabet pasta|alphabet soup]] once and the [[spaghetti hoops|were all the letter O]]. What's the chances of that happening? [[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]]) 22:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

== Gary Gabelich & The Blue Flame ==
Hi Comrade, I updated all the raw URL references on the [[Gary Gabelich]] and [[Blue Flame]] pages as promised. I would have done it sooner but my father passed away around xmas/new year last year. Anyway, it's good to be back and gee I tought I was having a hard time with the old man not being around, looks like you've got a bit yourself here :(. Regards, Emir [[User:IRoNGRoN|☭ irongron ☭]] ([[User talk:IRoNGRoN|talk]]) 10:53, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
: I noticed, thanks for those. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
::np mate! I have since realised that citing page footers is not neccessary in citations, I should have checked as I got this from another editor when helping with the [[Lockheed A-12]] article... "→‎SAM evasion: footer text from web site is not relevant to cite". I'll go through and correct the citations and remove any website footers I put in. Regards, Emir [[User:IRoNGRoN|☭ irongron ☭]] ([[User talk:IRoNGRoN|talk]]) 06:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

== Superheater ==
Hi Andy, Please stop undoing the edits on Superheater and take the time to read the text. Unsaturated steam and wet steam are the same thing. When I first read the article, it was confusing, which is why I took the time to edit it. The revised text should be clearer to everyone. [[user:Jonathan 123987|Jonathan 123987]] [[user_talk:Jonathan 123987|talk]] 00:34, 26 January 2014

== FYI ==
Hi Andy. If you're not happy with the way user Wereith totally screwed you over recently over that non-free rendering of an engine, perhaps you could get your own back by exposing what many Wikipedia admins seem to be completely unwilling to even acknowledge (and which some others, like BlackKite, seem to be actively assisting in covering up) - Wereith is none other than the banned user Betacommand. He has all the same behavioural flaws, the same binary perception of policy, all the same interests, he even has the same retarded grasp of English (where instead of were for example). What he did to you is exactly what Betacommand used to do - whenever he is caught in a lie he simply ignores it and changes tack to another argument. The others in the debate didn't question it because they all already know, or at least suspect, that this is Beta returned, and so pulling Wereith up on such things would be as much of a waste of time now as it was with Beta. While he is undoubtedly right in many cases, even in spite of that, his entire approach is extremely damaging to Wikipedia. The number of users who end up completely disillusioned with the project or come away with the completely wrong idea about what policy on non-free imagery says, due to this arrogant, confrontational and frankly clueless wannabe robot approach, is huge. The community (and multiple arbcoms) has already expended a massive amount of time getting to that conclusion once in order to finally ban him, it really shouldn't have to repeat the same process again on the obviously flawed assumption that Wereith is a brand new user (and even if people doubt he is Wereith, they cannot ignore the obvious, that he is definitely not a brand new user). I've tried to raise this issue before in various ways, but as I'm sure you know - on Wikipedia the policy that matters above all others is WP:SOCK - anyone like me who makes a complaint without any identifiable history behind them, is automatically ignored, no matter how serious or damaging it would be if their allegations turned out to be correct (granted, this isn't Watergate, but as far as time-sink disruptive users go, Betacommand was top of the tree). As such, don't be too surprised if this is the only communication I am able to send on this account. The only way that Beta is going to be stopped is if an established user like your good self files an SPI on Wereith. It won't find any technical evidence I'm sure, as Beta knew all about how CU works, but as long as you make it a good one and fill it with plenty of diffs covering all the similarities - general behaviour, approach to dispute resolution (edit warring, battling), policy knowledge (or lack of), areas of interest (and the complete lack of interest in writing at all), the writing style - I'm sure a block would be forthcoming based on the deafening sound of [[WP:DUCK|quacking]] that it would expose. He might claim that the fact Wereith uploads non-free media (book covers, one of the tiny class of non-free media that is de facto acceptable) shows he is not Beta - but that activity stopped abruptly a while back - so it was clearly just a cover story, if you'll excuse the pun. His increased levels of arrogance and sarcasm to others (such as yourself in that NFCR), show that he clearly thinks he has gotten away with it, and is now not even really trying to suppress his true identity, so this is more than overdue. [[User:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]] ([[User talk:Arnhem 96|talk]]) 21:50, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually, could the reason he was exceptionally rude to you in the NFCR be that he maybe remembers you as a previous critic? Had you ever supported one of the countless block/ban proposals of Beta? Or had similar non-free image disputes with him? (I'd check for myself, but the archive search facility isn't much help in trying to verify that easily). [[User:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]] ([[User talk:Arnhem 96|talk]]) 22:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

: Thanks for the heads up. I question though whether this really changes the position much.
: The problem is not ''who'' such an editor is, but rather ''what'' they're doing. WP culture prioritises the slavish observance of rules over the value that such actions generate. There doesn't seem to be any reluctance at NFCR to join in with such behaviour. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 01:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

::Unbelievably I'm not blocked yet, so I'll respond. NFCC enforcement on Wikipedia has its problems, yes, but what you need to realise is that, due to his OCD level of interest in the activity and the many and varied behavioural problems that are unique to him, Beta will always have a massively disproportionate affect on Wikipedia as regards the perception, and indeed practice, of NFCC enforcement. While others will follow his lead while he is here, if he is not, then except perhaps Black Kite and Hammersoft (who is no longer an issue as he has decided to 'retire' from the activity out of frustration at not getting his way often enough, something he reminds everyone of at any opportunity), believe it or not, most of the other people who frequent venues like NFCR really wouldn't dare to treat you like an asshole just because you have a different view. And they certainly wouldn't dare to edit war against you or otherwise ignore you if there were other editors involved and shared your view (obviously, like all areas of Wikipedia, even in ideal conditions, interpreting NFCC is at heart always going to be a numbers game). The problem with Beta is, the existence of other editors never makes any difference. If he thinks an image fails NFCC, he will never ever change that view, no matter what. The fact he simply ignored you when you pointed out it was not an actual picture of an engine was no accident. The same tactic plays out day after day with Beta. Much like a robot, the tactics he uses against the people who challenge his view are all very predictable, and all entirely unaffected by what anyone else says. His behaviour is, at its core, the very antithesis of what collaborative editing is supposed to be all about. Imagine the effect that has on Wikipedia when the same thing happens to editors who are simply trying to improve Wikipedia with non-free imagery, day after day, sometimes multiple times a day, due to the script assisted industrial scale of his activities. It doesn't matter how many people disagree with him, it doesn't matter how many warnings he receives, it doesn't matter how many people tell him his approach is totally counter productive, in any situation like that he will still believe he is in the right, and everyone else is wrong. That is why you really need to expose the fact that, in defiance of an arbcom ban, he has just returned to Wikipedia and picked up where he left off. Because just like Beta, he is apparently not going to stop until every single instance of the use of a non-free image on Wikipedia adheres to his personal interpretation of 'policy' (and as far as Beta goes, policy is what you call any policy, guideline, essay or years old discussion between two people that supports his view). Other people can be reasoned with, or will at least respect consensus. Beta cannot. He must be exposed and therefore returned to his well-deserved and more than earned state of persona non-grata, for the sake of Wikipedia. [[User:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]] ([[User talk:Arnhem 96|talk]]) 18:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

::Andy, I'm disappointed to see you still wasting time trying to deal with Wereith as if he is just another user. I cannot stress to you enough just how futile that will be for you - you only need to look at how many times Betacommand brushed off warnings/blocks and even a couple of arbitration cases, how many different users tried and failed to get through to him or get admins to force him to comply with the basic norms of discussion and consensus. It went on for years before he was finally banned, and even then it involved numerous trips to ANI with countless episodes of wiki-lawyering as he bent and stretched his well earned restrictions. You only have two choices here if you're interested in your own sanity - either file an SPI, or completely ignore him. Trust me when I say that if he thinks you are wrong, even when (and especially when) you're right, nothing else matters. Nothing. Even in the unlikely event you prevail in any particular dispute, he will never ever admit he was wrong. And he will simply wait a few months and try the same edit again, hoping nobody notices. You will only save yourself and Wikipedia from repeating this entire years long farce again by exposing the fact he is a ban evading sock. I notice you think you don't have any hard evidence - you have to realise that you do - the sheer amount of similarities between the two users is effectively hard evidence as far as SPI goes. I've seen people banned as WP:DUCKs on much weaker cases than this, I really have. At the very least, the very least, he needs to be confronted with the fact that he is very clearly not a brand new user, so if he is not Beta, what is his explanation for that (per WP:SOCK, he is expected to have an actual answer for that, even if it is given to arbcom in secret). If I can't convince you, I'm also informing {{User|SlimVirgin}}, who he is also having issues with, maybe you can collaborate if you're not willing to file an SPI on your own? I am still amazed I am still not blocked, but as I become more visible, it's only a matter of time - then it will be down to you. [[User:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]] ([[User talk:Arnhem 96|talk]]) 20:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

::And just to re-iterate - right now, the guy is calling you, an editor who registered in 2007, an [[WP:CIR|incompetent]] [[WP:DICK|dick]]. That's pretty strong words from a guy who registered in 2012, and only started editing in any great volume this time last year. Yet he claims to "know complexity of NFCC far far more than you do." I wonder how. I wonder how a guy ends up knowing all about NFCC in just under a year, yet has not grasped the inevitable consequences of calling an editor of your experience and service, an incompetent dick (and obviously I'm not talking about NPA, but the intended meaning if someone was properly invoking those two links). I'll tell you how - this behaviour is the result of the exact same mental illness or developmental issue that used to cause Betacommand to do the exact same thing. The guy is making an absolute mug out of you with this crap. And if you indulge him in it by simply exchanging 3RR templates and nasty words, I have to say, you are being a bit of a mug. If he is no longer interested in merely trying to pretend to be a brand new user, if as it seem he now wants to actively take the piss out of you on the basis you both know he is Beta returned, you need to hit him where it hurts - I have no doubt he was devastated when he finally got banned, because he is simply addicted to Wikipedia. Unfortunately for him, a lot of people spent an awful lot of time coming to the conclusion that, in his case, Wikipedia is [[WP:THERAPY|not therapy]], and his continued presence was [[WP:BAN|not required for at least a year]]. (I cannot believe I also forgot to mention Betacommand has form for socking around blocks - see User:Quercus basaseachicensis). [[User:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]] ([[User talk:Arnhem 96|talk]]) 20:49, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Andy. Once again I have to stress to you to not even try to interact with Werieth on the assumption he is a normal editor - you are seriously just wasting your time. I note the filing of SPI, and beefing this up with diffs really is the only way you will ever get rid of this guy for good. I can provide you with some, but you can see form the attitude of some admins that they are not going to let me stick around to do a proper job. Here's some to be getting on with. You should remember, Beta used the main identities Betacommand and later "Δ" (Delta). He also had various socks (see [[:Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Betacommand]]), the investigations of which might yield further diffs.

Regarding the obsession with NFCC enforcement, it should be sufficient to just link to a few 500 page views of random months for each account, but here's Werieth confirming it his own words in a brilliant way as well (in the context of how relatively new that account is):
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=564933859 "I have done thousands of non-free image enforcement edits"]

* Side interests in technical areas, and gnoming & script editing:
Werieth [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anomie/Archives/2012#OrphanReferenceFixer]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Werieth&dir=prev&offset=20121221161256&limit=500&target=Werieth] (huge run of expand book citation edits)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Werieth&dir=prev&offset=20130126084600&limit=500&target=Werieth] (a perfect example - in 500 edits, as well as mass NFC enforcement, we also see contributions to village pump (tech)/bot request/spam blacklist project pages, as well as mass AWB edits, mass reference/external link edits (obviously script assisted editing). It shouldn't really be necessary to convince anyone that Beta was totally obsessed with technical matters and script/bot editing, but if anyone asks, you'll be able to find similar examples in their contribs quite easily

* affection for casting opposition as harassment
Werieth
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Werieth&diff=prev&oldid=585760906]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=564929477]
Betacommand
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Betacommand/20080301#Other_question_at_that_request]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Betacommand/20090101#Comment]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Betacommand&diff=prev&oldid=259585304]
Δ
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:%CE%94&diff=prev&oldid=457173925]

* affection for casting opposition as people who merely hate NFCC 'shooting the messenger'
Werieth
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=585262288]
Δ
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:%CE%94&diff=prev&oldid=436613640]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=431294876]
Betacommand
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=148400612]

* Habit of directing people to the 'third door on the left" when seeking to avoid discussing an NFC issue any further with an opponent
Werieth
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AElia_Kazan&diff=571411998&oldid=571411592]
Δ
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:%CE%94&diff=prev&oldid=427492512]

* Using where instead of were:
Werieth [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MyVoiceIsHeard/Archive] Δ
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Δ/20111201#Δbot]
Betacommand
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Betacommand/20090701#July_2009

By way of showing that their response to short term blocks - completely ignore, don't complain/appeal or even acknowledge, just wait it out, then resume the bad behaviour where they left off, is the same, then you can refer to these two as examples:
* Betacommand
blocked for 24 hours for 3RR on 06:42, 3 June 2008
(blocked indef 2 days later, for edit warring)
* Werieth
blocked for 48 hours for 3RR on 17:38, 3 December 2013
(resumed edit warring soon aftwerwards)

One thing I also noticed today - notice the way Wereith deceptively changed the header you used on his talk page into something that belittles/attacks the original poster [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Werieth&diff=prev&oldid=585760906] - I'm sure Betacommand has done that before, but I'm finding it hard to track down an example. Although I might be thinking of Beta's long time admirer/defender Hammersoft - he absolutely loved doing that as far as I can remember. He used to love altering headers to things like 'Trolling by ...'.

It's great news that someone has noticed the timings of the account creations - it's all damning when considered alongside everything else - especially as Wereith's defence is still just the lame point about how he uploads book covers (one of the few classes of non-free imagery that are accepted, no questions, so are not likely to be the target of someone like Beta) - you should point out in the SPI that, as I predicted, he only resumed those uploads recently after a long recess, coincidentally at the same time as he was yet again being likened to Betacommand.

Here's another interesting thing - Betacommand was obviously fully conversant with SPI procedures (in his later years he even ran a bot for the clerks). So, it's interesting that after just a few months editing, Werieth was at ease with filing SPI reports himself [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Eurallfree/Archive][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MyVoiceIsHeard/Archive][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Expatkiwi/Archive]
. The first one is from Jan 2013, just a few months into his Wikipedia career.

Here's another interesting thing too - years ago Betacommand used to run a bot which did various NFCC enforcement tasks, but it was so crap, and he was such a retard when it comes to dealing with other people (i.e. complaints), that it was eventually shut down. Unsurprisingly, he was of the opinion that the bot was superb, not least as it did nothing but enforce policy, and he basically blamed everyone else for the grief and hassle it generated. With that in mind, and given the relative youth of the Wereith account, isn't it strange that he would have formed views like this: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Werieth&diff=prev&oldid=585760906]. Can Wereith explain at all how/where/when he would form that opinion about bot assisted NFCC editting, given that as far as I know, Betacommand was the last person to have first hand experience of it.

I'm sure if you just peruse the talk page archives you will find plenty of links to give that will support the broader similarities in how they deal with opponents, such as the habit of casting anything on any NFC page as black and white policy, or claiming that every opponent is simply someone who wants to ignore NFC altogether (try and pick examples where that is manifestly not the case). There's not much point me looking for those, as it's almost as much work to explain them to you, as it would be for you to find them and be able to explain them yourself. But I hope I've been clear enough in these posts and elsewhere for you to know what to look for, but the best way will be for you to observe what Wereith does now and look for similarities in Beta's past behaviour - the only thing that's changed is that he is less sweary or a total twat, but the basic approaches to policy/opponents are the same. A few starters could be these - the way Wereith hates it when admins don't help him [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive817#user:Pofka_and_abuse_of_non-free_media] - and the way Wereith sees edit warring as a necessity, so that people "get the point" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWerieth&diff=585324334&oldid=585322085]. [[User:Formal Appointee Number 6|Formal Appointee Number 6]] ([[User talk:Formal Appointee Number 6|talk]]) 22:48, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

== [[List of fictional aircraft#Commercial|Source Clarification]] ==

Looking for clarification here, you inputted in the [[List of fictional aircraft#Commercial|List of fictional aircraft]] article, that ''"The film aircraft was a modified Handley-Page Halifax/Halton G-AHDM Falmouth. K.A.Merricks book, published in 1980, states: G-AHDM Falmouth went from BOAC to Aviation Traders; then to Westminster Airways; then converted as Reindeer G-AFOH for film No Highway in the Sky"'' '''K.A.Merricks''' is the author? If so what’s the name of the book? [[User:FOX 52|FOX 52]] ([[User talk:FOX 52|talk]]) 23:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
: Merrick, not Merricks (there should be an apostrophe there) and it's his book on the Halifax.
: {{Cite book
|title=Halifax: An Illustrated History of a Classic World War II Bomber
|last=Merrick |first=K.A.
|isbn=0711007675
|year=1980
|publisher=[[Ian Allan]]
}}
: [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

== Invitation to Trademark Policy Discussion ==

Hi Andy!

I noticed that you've contributed to the trademark article on Wikipedia. I wanted to reach out to you because the Wikimedia Foundation legal team has just released a [http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/11/18/call-for-input-on-the-new-trademark-policy/ draft trademark policy] for consultation with the Wikimedia community. The purpose of the new draft is to facilitate permissive use of the Wikimedia trademarks for the community while preserving protection of the marks.

I thought that you may have an interesting perspective to add to this discussion, given your interest in trademark law. I would like to personally invite you to review the [[:m:Trademark_policy|new draft]] and [[:m:Talk:Trademark_policy|contribute any comments]] you may have. We plan to keep the discussion open for two months and incorporate the feedback into the final trademark policy. We hope this new version of the policy will make it easier for community members to use the logos to encourage Wikipedia editing.

Best,

[[User:DRenaud (WMF)|DRenaud (WMF)]] ([[User talk:DRenaud (WMF)|talk]]) 00:39, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

==Atomic Demolition munition==
Andy, just a heads up, I removed the picture you like putting into the article [[Atomic Demolition Munition]] again. The reason being, is that the [[Sedan crater]] was caused by a deeply buried thermonuclear device with a yield around 104 kilotons. In contrast to ADM's that would not coake, mistnceivably be deeply buried when in use very often, if at all, as I don't think most targets would allow someone to drill a giant well hole to oblige would be atomic demolition teams. You dig? If you could find a picture of a [[surface burst]] or shallow [[Underground nuclear testing|underground nuclear explosion]] in the 20 to 40 kiloton range, that would be a lot more apt. What do you think? As I've just added one that was ~ 1 kiloton in yield.

[[Special:Contributions/83.71.31.96|83.71.31.96]] ([[User talk:83.71.31.96|talk]]) 12:47, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
: My mistake, I thought that Plowshare Sedan had been one of the ADM series. Just checked in Hansen and it isn't. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:03, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

== The Wikipedia Library Survey ==

As a subscriber to one of [[WP:TWL|The Wikipedia Library]]'s programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this [https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_23JuoVF5e7dgDl3 '''brief survey.'''] Thanks and cheers, [[User:Ocaasi|Ocaasi]] [[User talk:Ocaasi|t ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Ocaasi| c]] 15:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


== Green Goddess ==
Thanks for the Green Goddess picture on Coventry Climax. I am wondering if you have reasons to have placed the pic in the Final Years section, not in the Pre- or Post War. I don't even know what engine type was used on it, so would appreciate your further attention. [[User:Yiba|Yiba]] ([[User talk:Yiba|talk]]) 12:41, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
: I'd rather replace it with a picture of the trailer-mounted Godiva pump, rather than the one on the Green Goddess. I didn't put it in any particular section, just restored it, but as the Goddess-specific installation that is post-war, rather than wartime. I would see a specific wartime section as worthwhile; their trailer-mounted fire pumps were a significant part of civil defence planning. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:10, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

== Tank article: Porsche as inventor of torsion bar suspension ==

Hello. I have created a Talk section on the Tank article to discuss this. Can you please justify crediting Porsche with invention of torsion bar suspension or its use on AFVs? Thanks in advance. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Vasiliy Fofanov|Vasiliy Fofanov]] ([[User talk:Vasiliy Fofanov|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vasiliy Fofanov|contribs]]) 20:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC) 

== Tin box ==

Hi, just a quick note to say that I've mentioned you [[Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Tin_box|here]]. [[User:Horatio Snickers|Horatio Snickers]] ([[User talk:Horatio Snickers|talk]]) 17:33, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
== Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in. ==
[[File:Peacedove.svg|60px|left]]
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard]] regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "[[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Tin box|Tin box]]".
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! [[User:EarwigBot|EarwigBot]] ''[[User:The Earwig|operator]] / [[User talk:The Earwig|talk]]'' 17:33, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

== SPI question ==

Hi Andy, I just saw [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Formal_Appointee_Number_6&diff=585895571&oldid=585850372 this question]. You'll have to ask {{user|Future Perfect at Sunrise}} about his reasoning though, I can't speak for him. Alternatively, you could talk to the checkuser team, as they more-or-less have the final say in sockpuppetry investigations. [[User:Mark Arsten|Mark Arsten]] ([[User talk:Mark Arsten|talk]]) 01:54, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

== Can we get a few things straight? ==

Before you come out with something like that again.
* Yes, I was a staunch defender of Betacommand. I believe (and still believe now) that he was hounded off the project by a number of users who didn't like his - mostly correct - enforcement of NFCC. At least two of those editors have since been permabanned, and others have disappeared.
* But no, I will not stand for him socking, if he indeed is doing so. My main concern is that the next account that comes along and aggressively enforces NFCC is immediately accused of being Beta (Werieth wouldn't be the first). However, if Werieth is Betacommand, they should be blocked. I actually think, however, that you aren't doing the SPI many favours with our sock friends' "evidence", though - most of it proves nothing. The "Third door on the left" stuff, for example, was a dramaboard meme a few years ago - [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=third%20door%20on%20the%20left&fulltext=Search&profile=help&redirs=1]. You give me some ''actual'' evidence that Werieth is Betacommand, and I'll support a block all the way. But not until then. [[User:Black Kite|Black Kite]] ([[User talk:Black Kite|talk]]) 20:08, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
: I don't know if Werieth is a Betacommand sock or not. I had little to do with Betacommand, I'm not terribly familiar with his style. Personally I see Werieth's behaviour as bad enough ''of itself'' to be a problem, whoever he is.
:: You demand evidence. That's reasonable enough – except that when it comes to [[user:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]], you're less fussy: At [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#self_admitted_sock]] you claim that they're blocked: ''"Oh for goodness sake, Andy. This is a previously checkuser identified blocked editor"'' Which you then justify with a link [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Request_Denied_Forever] ''to a different editor''. Betacommand had a great many editors with a grudge (right or wrong) against them. You can't just extrapolate that because one editor was CU'ed to a blocked editor then ''all'' editors acting against Betacommand are the same person! Per AGF, even if you ''suspect'' so, you can't act on that basis. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
::: But surely you must realise that the evidence is in front of you? An account with that much knowledge of Betacommand's activities is one of two - either a current editor who is hiding their identity ([[WP:ILLEGIT]]), or alternatively a blocked or banned editor ([[WP:SOCK]]). I don't see any way that this account is ''not'' either of the above? (And, to be honest, it's fairly obvious that the CU blocked sock is the same user as this one, even so). If Werieth's behaviour is that bad ''in itself'' then surely the preferred location is [[WP:RFC/U]]? [[User:Black Kite|Black Kite]] ([[User talk:Black Kite|talk]]) 19:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
:::: ''"the evidence is in front of [me]"'' What evidence?, where?
:::: I see good reason to believe that [[user:Arnhem 96|Arnhem 96]] is not a new editor. Clearly they dislike Betacommand and Werieth. However that applies to a ''lot'' of editors. There is no evidence to link them to any particular editor beyond this. Yet several admins involved in this have persisted in implying that they are. That is factually inaccurate, or as it's called when non-admins do it, "lying".
:::: I do not like socking, nor even alternate accounts (the necessary uses for which are far fewer than those for which they're claimed). I wish that this editor had instead simply emailed me. However what they posted appears accurate. They are diffs: it's a simple matter to verify them. This effort to suppress any discussion ''of the return of a banned editor'' is far worse than any minor socking. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
::::: ''[rant by harassment sock removed. – [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 03:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)]''
*Hi, Black Kite (hullo AD). Do you wonder why so many of the people who enforced WP rules against bc when he repeatedly proved that his determination to enforce guidelines was to the detriment of the editing environment and against the consensus of the editorship have since left? Well, I suggest it is because of people not being able to see that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Werieth&diff=prev&oldid=586231143 edits like this are entirely consistent with the modus operandi of betacommand.] I tagged Werieth as a bc sock within weeks of them editing - and had such a fun time at SPI that I went back into retirement. Now I may be no great loss to WP, but how many good admins editors have simply walked away for similar reasons? [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 22:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
* Andy, it seems very clear that one of the socks which posted in that SPI is Wikinger. The IP who participated in the discussion linked to the Japanese version of [[Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Wikinger]], which looks like self-identification. I don't know who "Formal Appointee" or "Arnhem" are, except that their behaviour suggests that they are both the same person, and the accounts must obviously belong to someone who has been around for some time. --[[User:Stefan2|Stefan2]] ([[User talk:Stefan2|talk]]) 15:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

== Final warning ==

I have warned you before to stop enabling that sock troll by reposting their material. The troll is clearly engaging in a wiki-hounding agenda, and by colluding with them you are contributing to that wiki-hounding. Proxying for block-evading socks is not legitimate. This goes for any place, including your own talk page. If I see you doing this again, I will block you. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 04:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

:And that is the biggest assumption of bad faith I have ever seen. [[tu quoquo]]? [[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]]) 21:57, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

==Discussion open at [[WP:DRN]]==
: A volunteer has opened the case. Please feel free to proceed with discussion now. Thanks for your patience. -- — [[User:Keithbob|Keithbob]] • [[User_ talk:Keithbob|Talk]] • 18:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
:: It appears that Pkgx has aready done with the discussion. Yet again, everyone else is all wrong. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

== (Non-)Strategic Materials in main Mosquito Article ==

Hi Andy,
I removed the livelink to Strategic Materials because no Article on that subject exists. Are you planning to write one? Otherwise, I recommend you should agree to my removal of the square brackets around the term. Best Wishes.Dendrotek 22:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dendrotek|Dendrotek]] ([[User talk:Dendrotek|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dendrotek|contribs]])  
: Please read [[WP:REDLINK]] [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:10, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Andy, I've read that. So again, my question - are ''you'' going to write an article on Strategic Materials? I might also add, is this an online encyclopedia, or trying to be a rival to the Oxford English Dictionary?!Dendrotek 21:21, 21 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dendrotek|Dendrotek]] ([[User talk:Dendrotek|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dendrotek|contribs]])  
::I've also removed a few red links. It's good form to write the article first, then link it. Thanks. [[User:Magnolia677|Magnolia677]] ([[User talk:Magnolia677|talk]]) 16:17, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
::: Either of you are free to write the article yourselves, if you're so keen. Don't let me stand in your way.
::: If you're so against redlinks, and our long-established practice in this area, then I suggest you take that up at [[Wikipedia talk:Red link]] or even [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for Deletion/Wikipedia:Red link]]. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:23, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
::::I looked at the "what links here" on the "strategic materials" red-link article, and every page linking to it is yours. Doing this is not "long-established practice". Please take a moment to read [[WP:RED]], particularly "do not overlink in the mainspace solely for use as an article creation guide. Instead, editors are encouraged to consider Write the article first, or to use WikiProjects or user spaces to keep track of unwritten articles." Thank you. [[User:Magnolia677|Magnolia677]] ([[User talk:Magnolia677|talk]]) 20:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
::::I have to agree with the others. It's a bit questionable to extensively redlink an article you haven't yet written. . --[[User:Yaush|Yaush]] ([[User talk:Yaush|talk]]) 16:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
:::::< It's much worse to redlink an article you have no plans to write > I'm confused. [[WP:RED]] also says ''In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article'' [[Special:Contributions/86.168.89.147|86.168.89.147]] ([[User talk:86.168.89.147|talk]]) 04:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
:::::: I see no confusion here, [[WP:REDLINK]] is quite clear. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:33, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

==Glad Tidings and all that ...==

[[File:Bolas navideñas.jpg|100px]] [[User:Bzuk|FWiW Bzuk]] ([[User talk:Bzuk|talk]]) 23:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

== [[WP:BURDEN]] ==

[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I'm [[User:TheRedPenOfDoom|TheRedPenOfDoom]]. I noticed that you made a change to an article, [[:Treehouse attachment bolt]], but you didn't provide a [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable source]]. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to [[Wikipedia:Citing sources|include a citation]] and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see [[Help:Referencing for beginners|the referencing for beginners]] tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|my talk page]]. Thank you.  -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom]] 13:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

: Please ''read'' the policies you're so fond of relying upon. BURDEN refers to the use of sources to support content within an article. Your claim is instead that a source is invalid; quite a different proposition.
: Also please see [[WP:3RR]], as you've already reached it. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

== [[Nutation]] RfC ==

Andy, if you really wish to avoid abuse, why did you add a personal attack to the discussion? It would be much better for you to vote and then take the page off your watchlist. That way your voice is heard but you don't get troubled by any rude responses. [[User:RockMagnetist|RockMagnetist]] ([[User talk:RockMagnetist|talk]]) 17:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

::::I think that people have done everything that needs doing. His edit of [[Nutation]] was reverted the same day and Op47 asked him to wait for the consensus. The creation of [[Nutation (engineering)]] may have been premature, but it doesn't do any harm. After all, even if the merge option were chosen (which seems unlikely now), it would be trivial to change that article to a redirect. For that matter, an unstated fourth choice would be to leave [[Nutation]] as it is but make [[Nutation (engineering)]] the main page for [[Nutation#Mechanical engineering]]. The important thing is that all the material on nutation in engineering has been left intact. [[User:RockMagnetist|RockMagnetist]] ([[User talk:RockMagnetist|talk]]) 16:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

::Andy, by your comments at [[Talk:Nutation]], I see that you think you are being treated unfairly. My main interest is not in this fight between you two, but in keeping the RfC on track. I removed your contribution because you fired the first salvo in this round, and there was nothing constructive about your first comment. I was hoping to prevent another pointless fight. I did reproduce your alert about [[Nutation (engineering)]], but in a way that was more neutral and informative. I also put a warning tag on the talk page of the IP editor who added the rude comments here. [[User:RockMagnetist|RockMagnetist]] ([[User talk:RockMagnetist|talk]]) 03:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

:::I've refactored this conversation to remove most mention of a 3rd party editor who I have asked not to post here further, and who might be blocked if they do. As a general rule, we should not talk about an editor in good standing in a forum where they cannot respond. If you still need to discuss this other editor, please do so at [[WP:ANI]], or other appropriate forum, not here. Thank you so much for your understanding. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] [[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]] 14:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
:::: OK, then, on that basis I'm happy to agree to your request. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

== Please revert your edit ==

[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adaptability_and_Partnership:_Issues_for_the_Strategic_Defence_Review&oldid=prev&diff=588907255 this] edit should be reverted and allow someone uninvolved close the discussion. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 02:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
: Oh? Has consensus at NFCR suddenly changed, that it no longer fails [[WP:NFCC#8]]? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 03:16, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
::Until the discussion is closed by an uninvolved user (which you are not, since you filed the NFCR) you shouldnt be removing the file. Your removal of the file before the NFCR has been closed is inappropriate. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 03:20, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
::: Not a principle you've followed! [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 03:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
::::Please find a NFCR that I opened and also closed? I dont close NFCRs that I have commented on. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 03:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
::::: I refer to your practice of blanket deleting images you object to, with, without or during NFCR. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 03:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
::::::I dont remove files during an active NFCR. And its not blanket removal. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 03:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

== [[Inflatable rat]] ==

Was it your legendary pettiness or simply some sort of holiday-induced hangover that inspired [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Inflatable_rat&oldid=589027096&diff=prev this]? One second of inspection by an educated source suggests the documented rationale is disingenuous at best (the Telegraph has never not been known to relay any right-wing trope carried by the red tops). Generously, you Googled for sources and, finding a bunch of self-reinforcing ones typically considered to be "reliable" by the Twitterati, dumped them en-masse to reinforce the one sentence of non-laughable fact you'd added. I'd suggest that if this were taken to talk, it'd result in removal again. I've thankfully reduced my wasted time on this sort of thing over the last six months; I'd hope you'd help me out in this manner by self-reverting. [[User:Thumperward|Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward)]] ([[User talk:Thumperward|talk]]) 22:46, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

: If you're concerned that these sources are too ''primary'', then I can understand that. I wouldn't trust the Daily Mail to tell me it was Friday, but I do consider it a reliable source for ''the DM's own'' soapboxing position that using the rat had turned a union protest into a howling mob. Blanking the lot though and claiming that the Telegraph is an unreliable red top, so untrustworthy as to be deleted on sight, is just ridiculous though. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:31, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

== Optional end tags ==

Hi, regarding the sentence "Many tags, especially the closing end tags, are optional." - this implies that ''all'' end tags are optional, which is not the case. True, {{tag|p|c}} is omitted more often than it is used - but neither the section nor that paragraph are specific to {{tag|p|o}}, and that tag is mentioned only once, in the first paragraph. In HTML 5, the list of [http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#optional-tags optional tags] is significantly shorter than the list of [http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/index.html#elements-1 all elements]. --[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 19:41, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

: I'm confused by your comment, ''"Elements: the number of elements with mandatory end tags vastly exceeds those where it is optional (COLGROUP DD DT LI OPTION P TD TFOOT TH THEAD TR) even if you count the empty elements (AREA BASE BR COL HR IMG INPUT LINK META PARAM))"''

: Are we talking about tags (things in documents) or tag ''types'' (definition sections in the standard)? In such a case, the number of omitted {{tag|p|c}} ''far'' exceeds any number of tag types listed. My point is that the tags which can be and are ignored altogether (like {{tag|tbody|o}}) just aren't an important issue for HTML coders or even numerically common, in comparison to the case (above all) of omitting {{tag|p|e}} to explicitly close an element. The common case, vis "especially" is this omitted closure.
: As for {{tag|br|o}}, that end tag isn't omitted, it's not even permitted. Of course any agent will silently ignore such as error as providing one (esp. for Appendix C reasons), but the standard is still clear that {{tag|br|c}} isn't merely optional, it's wrong. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
::In {{diff|HTML|prev|589807394|my edit summary}}, the text "Elements:" is in grey so it's the section heading, not my comment. I was also constrained by the 255-byte limit of the ref summary, so for brevity I listed only those tags which were in HTML 4 and ignored the new ones for HTML 5. In HTML 4, the various elements may be divided into two main groups. The first comprises thirteen empty elements, where the start tag is mandatory, but there is neither content nor an end tag; these elements are <code>AREA BASE BR COL HR IMG INPUT LINK META PARAM</code> (plus <code>FRAME</code>, only found where frames are used, and the deprecated elements <code>BASEFONT ISINDEX</code>). The second group comprises the enclosures, each comprising start tag, content, and end tag. In four cases (<code>BODY HEAD HTML TBODY</code>) both start and end tags are optional; in eleven cases (<code>COLGROUP DD DT LI OPTION P TD TFOOT TH THEAD TR</code>) the start tag is mandatory but the end tag is optional; and in the remainder (<code>A ABBR ACRONYM ADDRESS B BDO BIG BLOCKQUOTE BUTTON CAPTION CITE CODE DEL DFN DIV DL EM FIELDSET FORM H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 I INS KBD LABEL LEGEND MAP NOSCRIPT OBJECT OL OPTGROUP PRE Q SAMP SCRIPT SELECT SMALL SPAN STRONG STYLE SUB SUP TABLE TEXTAREA TITLE TT UL VAR</code> plus <code>FRAMESET IFRAME NOFRAMES</code> (frames) <code>APPLET CENTER DIR FONT MENU S STRIKE U</code> (deprecated)), both start and end tags are mandatory. Of the elements deprecated in HTML 4.01, three (<code>MENU S U</code>) are no longer deprecated in HTML 5.
::So out of about 115 different elements defined in the HTML 4 standard, there are 28 where an end tag is either optional or invalid, giving 87 where the end tag is mandatory. This is what I meant by "the number of elements with mandatory end tags vastly exceeds those where it is optional". The phrase that I used later "even if you count the empty elements" refers to including the 13 empty elements among those which do not have a mandatory end tag.
::To return to the sentence "Many tags, especially the closing end tags, are optional." the "many tags" here totals just 19: the start and end tags for <code>BODY HEAD HTML TBODY</code> (i.e. 8 tags) and the end tags for <code>COLGROUP DD DT LI OPTION P TD TFOOT TH THEAD TR</code> (11). I therefore feel that "many tags" is significantly overstating it. --[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 01:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

::: I think we're coming at this from different directions here: you're counting the ''types'' of tag, I'm counting their ''incidence'' in documents.
::: I have little interest within this scope in the {{tag|thead|o}} case. It's a high level article, that's obscure. I don't think it really belongs there. What I'm more interested in is the hugely common issue of omitting {{tag|p|c}} (and maybe {{tag|li|c}}) because the ETAG is genuinely optional and implied by the DTD content rules. That's what I think needs mention here. If you have any other forms of wording that would make this clearer, then I'm not attached to the current form of words, but I do think the emphasis should stay on the very common tags that require the start tag but make their end tags optional. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
::::I don't know why you're singling out {{tag|thead|o}}, I only mentioned it as part of a list that would otherwise be incomplete. The impression that I don't want to give is that the end tags for commonly-used elements (like {{tag|a}} {{tag|div}} {{tag|h1}} {{tag|i}} {{tag|table}} {{tag|ul}}) are optional, when they are definitely mandatory. Browsers vary in the methods that they use for coping with these elements if they are found not to be closed. --[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 19:20, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

== [[Panzer II]] ==

You reverted to a DAB link. Perhaps you can fix this. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 14:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
: We don't have a better target. [[Drivetrain]]s aren't the same thing as [[powertrain]]s, and in this case drivetrain is significantly correct (lack of new engine developments became as big a problem for Germany in the late war as they had been for the UK in the early years.). Really we need an article at [[drivetrain (drivetrain)]] (or better, move [[drivetrain]] to [[drivetrain (disambiguation)]]. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:23, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

:No problem. All I was really doing is correcting a spelling correction, someone changed it to "drive train". Thanks. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 18:44, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Original Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For preventing [[Bible translations into the languages of China]] from being quietly blanked. Thank you. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 12:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
|}

: Thankyou, I hope both articles may flourish. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:16, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Mr Whoppit]] ==
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|link=|48px|]]

The article [[Mr Whoppit]] has been [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed for deletion]] because of the following concern:
:'''all the "sources" are of absolutely non reliable kind'''

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be [[WP:DEL#REASON|deleted for any of several reasons]].

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] or on [[Talk:Mr Whoppit|the article's talk page]].

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion process]], but other [[Wikipedia:deletion process|deletion process]]es exist. In particular, the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion]] process can result in deletion without discussion, and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] allows discussion to reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for deletion. -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom]] 23:15, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

== Nomination of [[:Mr Whoppit]] for deletion ==
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article '''[[:Mr Whoppit]]''' is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]].

The article will be discussed at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr Whoppit ]] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom]] 23:30, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

== Your [[WP:GA|GA]] nomination of [[Gaunless Bridge]]==
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article [[Gaunless Bridge]] you nominated for [[WP:GA|GA]]-status according to the [[WP:WIAGA|criteria]]. [[Image:Time2wait.svg|20px]] This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.  Message delivered by [[User:Legobot|Legobot]], on behalf of [[User:ТимофейЛееСуда|ТимофейЛееСуда]] -- {{User-multi
|doc=yes
|User=ТимофейЛееСуда
|1=t
}} 22:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

== Your [[WP:GA|GA]] nomination of [[Gaunless Bridge]]==
The article [[Gaunless Bridge]] you nominated as a [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article]] has been placed on hold [[Image:Symbol wait.svg|20px]]. The article is close to meeting the [[WP:GA?|good article criteria]], but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See [[Talk:Gaunless Bridge]] for things which need to be addressed.  Message delivered by [[User:Legobot|Legobot]], on behalf of [[User:ТимофейЛееСуда|ТимофейЛееСуда]] -- {{User-multi
|doc=yes
|User=ТимофейЛееСуда
|1=t
}} 17:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

== Your [[WP:GA|GA]] nomination of [[Gaunless Bridge]]==
The article [[Gaunless Bridge]] you nominated as a [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article]] has failed [[Image:Symbol unsupport vote.svg|20px]]; see [[Talk:Gaunless Bridge]] for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.  Message delivered by [[User:Legobot|Legobot]], on behalf of [[User:ТимофейЛееСуда|ТимофейЛееСуда]] -- {{User-multi
|doc=yes
|User=ТимофейЛееСуда
|1=t
}} 00:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:No Spam Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The No Spam Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for prodding the relatively tiny [[New Apostolic Church in India]]. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 23:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
|}

== [[Coke (fuel)]] ==
Andy: How is my edit vandalizing? [[User:Junvfr|~~Junvfr <~_~>]] ([[User talk:Junvfr|talk]]) 23:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

: Hi [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coke_%28fuel%29&diff=prev&oldid=593449415 your edit] certainly wasn't vandalism and no-one is calling it that. However coke isn't mined either: coal is mined, then coal is turned into coke in a coking oven on the surface. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

== ani 3rr ==

You're aware of [[WP:3RR]], right? [[User talk:NE Ent|NE Ent]] 19:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

: I can count: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=594089669&oldid=594089545] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=594090117&oldid=594090044] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=594091182&oldid=594091032]
:: Four: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=594093237&oldid=594093164]
: I'm sure [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise#Heads up]] will act equivocally in this, now that he's been canvassed for his support. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:55, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
::I did not canvas anyone, FPaS was the one who gave you the last warning in regards to you proxying for a sockpuppet. I felt it appropriate to give them a heads up that your behavior has continued despite the warnings that where given. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 20:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
::: Who is the sockpuppet? The rather obvious {{u|79.70.66.86}}, {{u|79.70.79.23}}, {{u|79.70.66.74}}? Or {{u|Garbage turk}}, for whom you have provided ''no'' evidence that they are a sock of a blocked user, merely that they are challenging your behaviour in a way that you don't like.
::: If you have evidence that someone is a sockpuppet, then go through SPI and demonstrate this. Otherwise you have ''no'' justification for claiming Garbage turk to be a sock, let alone for claiming they're also an (unidentified) banned user. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
:::::{{ec}} I have already had a CU look into it and they blocked several socks. I have already requested a CU for the newest sock. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 20:12, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
::::Werieth didn't block Garbage turk as a sock, so your issue isn't with him.[[User talk:NE Ent|NE Ent]] 20:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
::::: Werieth is repeatedly blanking my comments and Garbage turk's at ANI (see diffs above: 4RR at ANI and <s>5RR</s>6RR (so far) at [[User talk:Garbage turk]]) on the grounds that Garbage turk is a sock of a banned user. There is no evidence for this. At [[User_talk:Hell_in_a_Bucket#ANI]] he offers to ''"[...] provide some''(sic)'' the account names."'' but has not done so, either now or in the past. AGF still applies to Garbage turk. We have no reason and even no ''right'' to treat them as if banned. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:16, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

== Note ==

I think my warning from last time was quite clear enough, and the fact that the {{user|Garbage turk}} account was the same harassment troll who was involved the last time was quite obvious enough. Please don't insult our intelligence by going on about how there was "no evidence" about it – continuing that pretense would only put your own acting in good faith into doubt. The only reason I'm not blocking you right now is that the offending account has been blocked in the meantime, so I suppose at this point the block would come across as "punitive, not preventive" – but rest assured that if it turns out you continue with this kind of behaviour, blocks will come, and with no further warning. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 22:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

: Then ''please'' raise me at ANI.
: I disagree ''absolutely'' with your self-created policy that some users are non-persons and their words must be removed from all places. Not ''can'' or even ''should'', but you impose this as ''must'', against the direct wishes of other GF editors.
: As best I understand it, we have two socks. One is Arnhem 96 / Garbage turk etc. They appear to me to be an editor acting in what is a GF attempt to expose Werieth as the returned sock of Betacommand. They are far from alone in believing this, per the several SPIs. I believe this myself. I am ''permitted'' to believe this and I am ''permitted'' to tell other editors that I believe this. You might note some very specific comments to that effect at [[User talk:DeltaQuad#Troll sock series]]
: There is also another sock, which I now believe to be {{u|Wikinger}}. I have no idea who Wikinger is/was and don't particularly care – although it would have been extremely useful for you to tell me this at the time. ''This'' was the sock over whom we previously had the dispute. I have no interest in furthering the aims of such a troll (cheers for the little hint there that my own good faith is in such tenuous regard). However I have even less interest in facilitating the career of Betacommand. You surely do not believe Garbage turk to be Wikinger or you would have presumably simply come out and said so.
: There is a significant difference between the two of these: one is known and banned. Garbage turk is not (Werieth claims to know who he is, but won't divulge this). You and Werieth do not, per AGF, have the right to behave as if you "know" that Garbage turk is banned and so feel free to ignore 3RR et al in your pursuit of him.
: You behaviour is unpleasantly partisan. Werieth can behave badly everywhere and lie repeatedly in the ANEW and you say nothing. An IP can sock away in the ANI thread, or attacking my talk: page, and you do nothing. Yet Garbage turk appears and suddenly they're a worse editor than Betacommand and must be blanked and their edits, even to [[User talk:Garbage turk|their own talk page]] removed beyond all regular practice. I'm just surprised that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=594085522 their post] at ANI hasn't been revdel'ed yet. A post that doesn't breach CIVIL any more (about 300 milliErics) than is already common at ANI. Mind, I suppose you object to his pointing out that you as "a hard line NFCC admin" have so much of a shared interest with both Betacommand and Werieth. As for your rapid response to Werieth canvassing you on your talk page, that's shameful.
: In [[User talk:Arnhem 96]]'s block we see [[user:Floquenbeam]] taking the bold step of "taking ownership" of the block because the original blocking admin was in a dubious position. That's a positive action and I commend them for it. I would do exactly the same with Arnhem 96's detailed comments for the Betacommand SPI as I support each part of them. Per [[WP:EVADE]], ''" Editors who subsequently reinstate edits originally made by a blocked editor take complete responsibility for the content."''. Yet in that case I was ''not'' allowed to do so, under your threat of immediate blocking. Not because they were Arnhem 96's (you still do not know who Arnhem 96 is) but by using the excuse that a Wikinger sock had now become involved. Perhaps I was indeed naively being used by Wikinger for their trolling, but no more than you're letting yourself be used by Werieth. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
:: I'm honestly tired of debating the whole ugly proxying-for-socks issue with you. I'll just say this much: Yes, of course "Garbage turk" ''is'' a blocked/banned user. He is, at a minimum, a sock of the other socks (User:Arnhem 96, User:Formal Appointee Number 6 etc.). Since he was blocked on those accounts, his reappearance is, obviously, block evasion, which automatically makes his edits fall under the removal rules. It really doesn't matter if there is an identifiable named sockmaster behind these known accounts and whether that master is currently banned or not. Anybody who creates this many throwaway accounts for obviously illegitimate purposes is ''de facto'' banned. If there is some as-yet-unknown good-hand account of the sockmaster that is seemingly still in good standing, so much the worse for them; if it were ever to be identified it would simply be treated as yet another previously undetected sock, and blocked immediately. Through his harassment sockpuppetry, Arnhem 96 or whoever is behind him actually ''is'' a "worse editor than Betacommand" – Betacommand had his character flaws but was otherwise undoubtedly a committed and good-faith contributor. No committed good-faith Wikipedian could ever engage in serial sockpuppetry of the kind this person has engaged in. Calling this a potentially good-faith behaviour is just outrageous and unworthy of a person of your intelligence.
:: I'm honestly at a loss to understand where you think [[User:Wikinger]] comes into all of this, though. You must have misunderstood something about this. IIRC, there were some Wikinger IPs turning up at one of the SPIs back in December, but they were certainly not the sock "over whom we previously had the dispute". The socks I warned you not to support back then were obviously not Wikinger but that Arnhem 96 series. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 00:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
::: You haven't debated a thing. You've threatened. And worse, you've threatened at Werieth's beck and call. Shameful. Why are you so afraid of an editor, blocked, socked or whatever, raising the relevant diffs for that SPI so that previously uninvolved editors can then judge that SPI? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:49, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

== Hi-fi icons ==

So far, I've covered Arnold Wolf • Isobaric speakers • Ivor Tiefenbrun • JBL Paragon • Julian Vereker • Linn Products • Linn Isobarik • Linn Sondek LP12 • LS3/5A • NAD 3020 • Naim Audio • Naim Audio amplification • Naim NAIT • Rega Planar 3 • Quad Electroacoustics • Quad Electrostatic Loudspeaker‎ • Roksan Audio • Roksan Xerxes • Totem Acoustic • Yamaha NS-10. Do you have any other suggestions? --[[User:Ohconfucius|''' Ohc ''']][[User talk:Ohconfucius|''¡digame!'']] 14:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
: Yes, I noted several of those. Something on cartridges might be good - I don't think we have much there at present. Just explaining the principles well would be nice. Where there any mega-selling cartridges worth individual note? Didn't Shure have one? Otherwise, for simple "notable from sheer numbers" there's the [[Dual CS-505]] and the [[Mission 700]]s. [[Heybroook HB-1]]s? I've a pair of those upstairs waiting for me to glue new foam surrounds into them. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

== [[Rolls-Royce C range engines]] ==

I have an original Rolls-Royce Workshop Manual. There is no specific definition of these engine in terms of "range" or "series" but the word "range" appears in a couple of places. [[user:aglandb|Bruce Agland]] 10/2/2014 —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 05:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC) 

== Blimps ==

Hi,

Since you reverted my edit to the [[Airship]] article, you may wish to contribute to the discussion at [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aviation#Blimps]]. — Cheers, [[User:Steelpillow|Steelpillow]] ([[User Talk:Steelpillow|Talk]]) 15:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

== Looks like I owe you an apology... ==

... and probably some kind of clear-the-air talk. I'm grateful for your post at ANI on the RfA saga, and it does show me that my previous comments about you being "blinded by an old grudge" were inaccurate. So, I'm apologizing for that, and I hope that we can leave as much bad blood behind us as is possible. [[User:Lukeno94|Lukeno94]] [[User talk:Lukeno94#top|(tell Luke off here)]] 14:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

: No problem, and thanks very much for your post here. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 16:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

== Welding Copy Edit ==

What was inaccurate about [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Welding&diff=595068489&oldid=594911604 my copy edit]?

-Duxwing — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Duxwing|Duxwing]] ([[User talk:Duxwing|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Duxwing|contribs]]) 16:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC) 

: Most of it. It's painfully obvious that you're not a welder, nor that you applied the necessary restraint for copyediting outside a domain of knowledge. Changing inert or semi-inert to simply semi-inert was when I decided to hit the button, but adding "whereby" (in a copy edit that's otherwise following the Dr Seuss school of Long Words Is Bad, m'kay) wasn't great, nor is changing workpiece to piece. When the improved version is as clunky as, ''"Arc welding's electrical power can be variously supplied. "'' then I felt no great urge to preserve these changes as I see that the copyediting was better beforehand. Changing "the length of the arc is directly related to the voltage, and the amount of heat input is related to the current. " (which is verbose, but unambiguous) to the easily confused "as current and voltage, respectively so heat input and arc length" is a downwards step in clarity. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 16:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

==ANI un-archival==
Andy, wanted to make sure you know that your edit just a few minutes ago seems to have un-archived quite a few unrelated threads. Was that your intent? Or did I miss something? The diff is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=595294659&oldid=595294239]. Thanks for doublechecking this - we get lots of walls of text at ANI, but 200k in one go seemed a bit unusual. [[User:Ultraexactzz|UltraExactZZ]] [[User_talk:Ultraexactzz|Said]] ~ [[Special:Contributions/Ultraexactzz|Did]] 13:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

:Leaky Cauldron reverted you, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=595295318 here]. [[User:Ultraexactzz|UltraExactZZ]] [[User_talk:Ultraexactzz|Said]] ~ [[Special:Contributions/Ultraexactzz|Did]] 13:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

: Sorry, just finger trouble (strictly, mouse battery) on my part. Thanks for fixing it. I was just trying to (simultaneously) find where the Future Perfect thread had gone and also post a (small!) comment on the Eric thread. Must have pasted it into the wrong window.
: Anyone have a good trout recipe? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

{| class="barnstar" style="border:1px solid gray; background:#fdffe7;"
|-
|rowspan="2" style="padding-right:5px;" | {{#ifeq:{{{3}}}|alt|[[file:Working Man's Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]|[[Image:Working Man's Barnstar.png|100px]]}}

|style="font-size:1.65em; padding:0; height: 1.1em;" | '''The {{GENDER:{{PAGENAME}}|Working Man's|Working Woman's|Working Wikipedian's}} Barnstar'''
|-
|style="border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For discovering a great way to notify everyone at once! Take this in lieu of a trout :-) [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 14:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
|}

== ANI ==

Hi Andy. I have temporarily removed your edit because it appears to add 205k of text. However, before you reinstate the relevant part please have a think about the suitability of the personal reference to Eric. He made that edit 3 days ago, before he retired and I think the reference to his personal circumstances is a bit OTT and will be seen to be a personal attack. It's your call, ultimately. Rgds, [[User:Leaky_caldron|Leaky ]][[User talk:Leaky_caldron|Caldron]] 13:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

: I'd stand by every word of it, but as it seems that what I thought was commenting to as a ''newly re-opened'' thread (and why I was so surprised to see it) was actually a stale window onto the start of the thread of a few days ago, it's right to drop it. Thanks for clearing my "rather large typo" though. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

==Talkback==
{{talkback|Smauritius|ts=13:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)}}
[[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 13:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

==Disambiguation link notification for February 15==

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation|disambiguation pages]]. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].

:[[Dorset button]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Dorset_button|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Dorset_button|fix with Dab solver]])
::added links pointing to [[Singleton (surname)]] and [[Ram's horn]]

:[[Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Service]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Hereford_and_Worcester_Fire_and_Rescue_Service|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Hereford_and_Worcester_Fire_and_Rescue_Service|fix with Dab solver]])
::added a link pointing to [[Pinzgauer]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 09:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

== rfc/u ==

Neutral notification to all participants in [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BeerXML]] of this: [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/PrivateWiddle]].— [[User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] ([[User_talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|talk]]) 15:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/PrivateWiddle]]==
Andy, I think you were too quick to respond to the above canvassing. You've added your comment in the "outside views" section, which is for people not involved. Very clearly, you ''are'' deeply involved and you've failed to restrict your comments to the issue at hand. I would suggest you amend your entry to make it clear that you are not impartial. [[User:Deb|Deb]] ([[User talk:Deb|talk]]) 18:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

:How is it canvassing, {{u|Deb}}?— [[User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] ([[User_talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|talk]]) 18:16, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
::The issue is about a user's signature, not about a deletion debate. I realise you would prefer to assume bad faith, but you are misguided. [[User:Deb|Deb]] ([[User talk:Deb|talk]]) 18:35, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
:::Even supposing that that's true, which I doubt, how does it make it canvassing, {{u|Deb}}?— [[User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] ([[User_talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|talk]]) 18:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
: In what way do you claim I'm connected with Private Widdle's sig, the specific subject of this RFC? Please, will you and Empress of the World, just raise me at ANI for my "attacks" and hasten the inevitable response the two of you get to this whole mess. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:17, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

:: While you're at it, why not raise [[User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] for breaching [[WP:CANVASS]] too, and see how far that flies. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:17, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

:::I noticed that, in your "outside view", you concentrated almost entirely on the conduct of the deletion debate (as did PrivateWiddle), throwing in a cursory mention of the signature issue to the effect that, because you (a man) are not offended, it is unreasonable for me to be. That's how you're "connected", as you put it. I have at no point suggested you have made any "attacks" on me - that's yet another misrepresentation of the facts. And you had the nerve to e-mail me this morning to ask me to correct another individual's conduct! ''And'' I actually took some notice of your comment; that'll teach me to try to deal reasonably with you. [[User:Deb|Deb]] ([[User talk:Deb|talk]]) 18:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
:::: So basically, as a man, I'm wrong. Thanks for that. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

::::Deb, surely you cannot be surprised at the boomerang effect—when raising questions about someone else, your own actions will be analyzed. I was surprised to see you and FIM ganging up on the articles started by PrivateWiddle, setting AfDs in motion without ever looking at the literature on the topic. To me, it looks like a personal vendetta rather than an objective protection of the wiki. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 06:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

How old are the people who take part in these discussions? What - eight, something like that? Jeesus. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.70.66.111|79.70.66.111]] ([[User talk:79.70.66.111|talk]]) 14:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC) 

== Talk R-R Merlin ==

I've removed the offending words, so could you please kindly remove your offensive comments from both pages? Thanks [[User:Minorhistorian|◆'''Min✪rhist✪rian◆]][[User talk:Minorhistorian|''MTalk'']] 01:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
: If I've made any offensive comments, then you know where ANI is. Here's [[WP:AGF]], which you seem to have mislaid. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 01:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

==DYK for Dorset button==
{{tmbox
|style = notice
|small =
|image = [[Image:Updated DYK query.svg|15px|Updated DYK query]]
|text = On [[Wikipedia:Recent_additions#18 February 2014|18 February 2014]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know?]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[Dorset button]]''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that after [[the Great Exhibition]] of 1851, '''[[Dorset button|button]]s''' were no longer handmade?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at [[Template:Did you know nominations/Dorset button]]. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ([[User:Rjanag/Pageview stats|here's how]], [http://stats.grok.se/en/201402/Dorset_button quick check]) and it will be added to [[WP:DYKSTATS|DYKSTATS]] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|Did you know? talk page]].
}} Thank you [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] ([[User talk:Victuallers|talk]]) 16:02, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

==Question==
It seems that IP {{ip|98.179.149.193}} has been causing trouble. I am wondering if (And how) to bring this to a Administrator.

Thanks,
[[User:Happy Attack Dog|Happy_Attack_Dog "The Ultimate Wikipedia Guard Dog"]] ([[User talk:Happy Attack Dog|talk]]) 15:35, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

: Don't worry about it, I've already raised them at [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism]]. Takes a while, but it'll get there. Read the links at the top of that page if you're interested in more detail. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

== Futurist Meals ==

Hello Andy,
Regarding the edits to the "futurist meals" page, I actually provided an explanation twice when I edited the page. You reverted the changes twice, although I appreciate that you sent a message the second time and explained the reason for the reversion. I removed the following sentence: "This is one of the few palatable dishes in Marinetti's Futurist Cookbook." As I explained twice, this statement is purely subjective. The author cannot make judgments about whether something is one of the only tasty dishes from a cookbook.

As well, the word "this" always requires a subject right next to it, so it's not even a well-expressed personal opinion that wouldn't belong there anyway. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/108.35.210.254|108.35.210.254]] ([[User talk:108.35.210.254|talk]]) 15:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC) 

: Have you read the book? Have you seen the ingredients for the other recipes? It's hardly subjective to consider ball bearings (with or without chicken) as unpalatable.
: For not realising that you were the same editor when you removed it a second time, unexplained, then I apologise – but we also call that kind of behaviour sockpuppeting. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

::It's a matter of opinion whether almond paste with black pepper is palatable or not and it would be best to quote a secondary source if one could be found; if not, describe without comment. (I have read ''La Cucina Futurista'', btw.) Cheers! [[User:Pelarmian|Pelarmian]] ([[User talk:Pelarmian|talk]]) 15:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
::: The palatability of adding pepper to a desert is, I would contest, within the bounds of reasonable culinary art. After all, there are plenty of chocolate recipes doing it. The point for this article though is that this is a rare example where the ingredients are even ''edible'', let alone palatable. It's not about whether this one is ''too'' weird, it's that it's the only one that's not ''clearly'' too weird. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 16:19, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

== Web conferencing ‎ and List of collaborative software ‎ ==
Hi Andy,

I have realised you have undone our edits on the ''[[Web conferencing]]'' and ''[[List of collaborative software]]'' pages. I feel Drum should be placed here. Could you please inform me if I doing something wrong or the reasons behind the edit being undone?

Thanks

Laurence [[User:Laurence Drum|Laurence Drum]] ([[User talk:Laurence Drum|talk]]) 11:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

: Please read some of the following:
: Originally, [[WP:NOTDIR]]
: Now, [[WP:BRD]]
: In detail, you have added inlined ELs (external links) to a See-also section listing other ''Wikipedia articles''. Drum does not have a Wikipedia article.
: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory (the web is full of directories and there are also search engines). Wikipedia is not here to boost SEO. What does adding a link to an article add ''to that article''? Wikipedia is constitutionally disinterested in "making a better list" or "helping people to find our product" (those are jobs for search engines). Wikipedia is only here to make good self-contained and trustworthy encyclopedia ''articles'', hosted here on WP. Adding an external link to a product site doesn't help that, because the link is undiscussed and unexplained further (WP has no content on Drum). It's also untrusted (Drum can be assumed to say "Drum is great", but we need instead some external and reliable or objective commentator to say "Drum is good/bad/set fire to my cat").
: There are two things you could do here:
:* Find a list of collaborative software (maybe one of the articles here meets this). Add Drum to that list, but do so in a way that meets [[WP:V]] by [[WP:RS]]: adding citations to reliable sources (credible 3rd parties, such as magazine reviews) to demonstrate that Drum is indeed a credible piece of such software.
:* Write a WP article on Drum. It would have to meet [[WP:N]] (Is Drum considered notable by 3rd party attention paid to it?) and [[WP:V]] / [[WP:RS]]. This is a slightly higher target, as it also requires [[WP:N]].
: You might also wish to read [[WP:COI]], especially in reference to your user name.
: Good luck with it. I'm not here to "deny access to Drum", but I am here to work on an encyclopedia, rather than a directory. I want to offer a service to readers reading just the pages here, I don't care (I am literally uninterested) in whether they read your Drum website beyond that. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

:: Thank you for getting back to me. There is a review about Drum on Web RTC insights (http://webrtcinsights.quadrigaconsulting.co.uk/index.php/drum-an-interview-with-the-ceo/), is this the type of link we could be including? Or does the link have to stay within Wikipedia? Thanks — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Laurence Drum|Laurence Drum]] ([[User talk:Laurence Drum|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Laurence Drum|contribs]]) 12:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC) 
::: That's the sort of thing - although WP typically prefers text to video. Find a couple of those and write [[Drum (conferencing)]]. Drum will probably be a better pitch as an article than NetDev. Also take a look at [[WP:AFD]] for past computing deletions and see just what sort of hurdles are out there, how to pass them and what things are failed for. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
:::: OK, I will find some content out there on Drum and then link it in. I will also check out those past deletions, thanks! [[User:Laurence Drum|Laurence Drum]] ([[User talk:Laurence Drum|talk]]) 09:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

==Disambiguation link notification for March 1==

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Lansdown, Cheltenham]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Henry Thompson]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Lansdown%2C_Cheltenham|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Lansdown%2C_Cheltenham|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 09:11, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
==Category:Automobiles powered by mid-mounted 4-cylinder engines==

'''[[:Category:Automobiles powered by mid-mounted 4-cylinder engines]]''', which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 March 1#Category:Automobiles powered by mid-mounted 4-cylinder engines|the category's entry]]''' on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|Categories for discussion]] page. Thank you. [[User:Lukeno94|Lukeno94]] [[User talk:Lukeno94#top|(tell Luke off here)]] 19:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

== Andy ==

Thank you for your congratulations. English is not my first language, please keep it simple. "If you can extrapolate your ability to work with him into the non-existence of a larger group of people who have found it impossible (and hence the topic ban), then you might have a point." - I don't know what you want to say there, sorry. I am not disputing that there is a topic ban, and will not question its justification, not with the current arbitrators, it seems a waste of time. I am disputing that Andy is "sticking two fingers", trying to reduce the enormous number of different infobox templates, - he is simply continuing what he did before the case, as much as possible. - Example: {{tl|infobox hymn}} has ugly CamelCase parameters and not even the possibility to include an image. {{tl|infobox song}} seems more appropriate to what I want in an infobox, --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 12:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

: Comment: Perhaps you are able to work with him. Many cannot. He is restricted and banned because of his inability to work with the majority.
: I have two concerns here:
:* It's common on WP for topic banned or warned editors to afterwards still stick very close to the core of their previous ban. I've not seen this work out well for either party.
:* I dispute a large number of these template deletions as simply poorly chosen. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:47, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

::Why he is restricted I don't know, not much of recent evidence was given, it seems to have to do with a past that I don't know. Why I am restricted I don't know, not much of evidence was given, but see above, waste of time. I supply infoboxes to my own articles because I believe they are good for them, and leave others alone, is that what you call "stick to the core"? I hope the arbitrators didn't expect me to change [[Wikipedia:QAI/Infobox|my quality standards]], same for Andy ;) --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 12:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
::You who know so much about why a restriction is given, could you point me at an instance of my bad behaviour, please? --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 12:20, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
::: ? Sorry? I know of no bad behaviour on your part. Sorry if I've ever given that impression. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:44, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
:::: No, you didn't give the impression you thought something about me. You only gave the impression that you know so certainly (and even used the term "proven") why someone is restricted. I am, and I can tell you, I don't know why (other than for defending Andy). While you were able to say several negative things about a fellow editor in one paragraph, I don't recall that I ever did that in four years here (and if I did I would like to know and go and apologize). I was in no edit war, - if you look at [[Sparrow Mass]] where I was called warrior you will see that it perhaps is not the appropriate expression. Therefore I came to think that arb restriction has to do with arbitrary, and it [[User talk:Gerda Arendt/Archive 2013#Arbitration case closed|helped to have worked]] on [[Kafka]] ;) --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 14:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
::::: I presume you mean, ''"it has already proven impossible for a substantial majority to do so [work with Andy Mabbett]"'', a statement that I would stand by. If you disagree with that, perhaps you would like to raise his topic ban for withdrawal as unwarranted. As also noted, I happen to agree with you and Andy on the value of adding infoboxes (yes, even the "invisible" infoboxes). However I still support his topic ban, as I've found him impossible to work with for years pre-WP, to the limits of my experience with him. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:18, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
:::::: As said above, I will not raise anything with the current arbs. I asked them, as you may know, to permit Andy to add infoboxes to his own articles, where there's certainly no conflict with anybody else, - denied, - kafkaesque, if you ask me ;) - If you look at my much shorter history (linked above, "quality standards"), you see the link to my first encounter with Andy, - I was against infoboxes then, but liked his sense of humour ;) --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 14:33, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

== Friction welding ==

Dear Andy Dingley ,thank U very much For your advice.I am a Telugu Wikipedia member,I write in [[telugu]] regularly.[[User:Palagiri|Palagiri]] ([[User talk:Palagiri|talk]]) 12:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

==Removing wrong links==
Hi Andy. I have removed the manual links from article [[Vehicle frame]] because they are already correctly linked to the [[Body-on-frame]] article. The way it was (and now it is back that way), it is referencing different subjects in other languages to the same article in english. Regards. --[[User:Marcric|MarcRic::Ruby]] ([[User talk:Marcric|talk]]) 23:44, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

== [[Group of glazed pottery luohans from Yixian|Luohans]] ==

Please don't add "citation needed" to quotations THAT ARE CLEARLY CITED AT THE END OF THE SENTENCE, and follow [[WP:CITE]] if you want to change the citation format. Thank you! [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 12:21, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
:Kinetsu and you appear incapable of looking at the reference at the end of the sentence. After this has been pointed out SEVERAL times re-adding the tags to something that is fully cited is merely disruptive. Don't ask me what is going on, try looking at the actual passage in question. The style of the first note is fully MOS-compliant, and your preferred style should not be introduced at whim without discussion. I expect this kind of behaviour from him, but not you. PLEASE REVERT YOURSELF AT ONCE. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 12:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
: Apart from the ALLCAPS shouting, I'm sure that WP:CITE doesn't suggest bulk reversion of changes just to restore a broken URL. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
::Will you actually look at the article please? [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 12:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
::: Rather obviously, of course I've already looked at the article (and a fine article it is too). However will you please stop talking down to other editors. It's not your article alone and these other editors might just possibly have valid points. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
:: John, I've raised the specific issues on the article (where ''everyone'' can more easily see them) and at your talk page, but you've chosen to ignore those and START SHOUTING all over my talk page.
:: Kintetsubuffalo does have the weight of policy behind them. There are peacock terms in the opening sentence. We don't in general like such things. Now I think they're probably fine to be there, but they ''should'' have cites close enough to them to support those specific terms, if they're being used as direct quotes like this, contra to PEACOCK. I believe that you are able to add such cites. I am not. The source ref is apparently an hour-long YouTube video, which I simply don't have time to watch, but I believe that you already have (Some of us have day jobs, and today I have three of them).
:: My terrible change to the ref was to fix the broken URL that ''you'' had put into it. If you don't like cite format changes, then I can understand that, but you're on firmer ground for complaining about other editors when ''your'' links actually work in the first place. As to my other changes, then I see these as very minor and justifiable formatting improvements, per our usual practices, and there is no reason to bulk revert them other than an obvious and growing problem with [[WP:OWN]]. There is no reason for you to behave so badly here (because both of you belong at ANEW already).
:: I am also profoundly sorry to see someone behaving in such a way when they're part of GLAM and now supposed to be WiR to the Royal Society. Why is GLAM seemingly run on the regular basis of editors who can't keep their toys in the pram? Some of us have to work with those museums IRL and I'm getting tired of having to hide my own editing on WP because I don't want to be associated with the bad press of the WP prima donnas they've met already. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:47, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
:::What is it about "Sickman, 200; Rawson, 159, both quoted" that you don't understand? What other quotes might be being referred to? That has always been there. I have now had to point this out several times in several places. The lecture is clearly used to ref the next sentence, and is nothing to do with the issue here. You are just not looking at the article with any degree of attention. I put in the new link that works, which you have chosen to put into your preferred format, inconsistent with the other references, clearly against [[WP:CITE]]. If you don't have time to edit properly, then don't edit at all. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 12:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
:::: What don't I understand? Perhaps the part where your claimed ref for this [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Group_of_glazed_pottery_luohans_from_Yixian&oldid=599080790] was just a run-on sentence tacked onto the end of a footnote about naming: "<code><ref></code>Art history sources mostly use "Yixian", though "Yi xian" appears more correct; Sickman, 200; Rawson, 159, both quoted<code></ref></code>". [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
:::::Huh? "just a run-on sentence", "claimed"? You're just being childish now. However I will change the sequence if it bothers you. There is no justification for changing the note formats (introducing inconsistency again) without discussion. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 13:24, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
::::::Your last version left the rest of the sentence unreferenced, wrongly attributed both quoted words to both sources, placed the refs contrary to MOS, not to mention using a pointy ref name. The text is fine now; please resist the urge to fiddle further without discussion on the talk page. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 13:33, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

== natural history societies ==

Hi Andy -- Thanks for commenting at the Chorley and District natural historical society AFD. I'd be fine with your recommendation there. I do think that having a list of natural history societies would be good. As it happens i can't easily start articles (am under a restriction); i can start articles via AFC but that is a random process that hasn't been working properly IMHO. If you agree that having a [[List of natural history societies]] would be good, and would create the article as a stub, I would like to develop it, with focus on those having Wikipedia articles (so demonstrated to be individual notable). By the way, i rather think that they'll mostly be in the U.K.; while regular historical societies are common across the pond, where i am, I don't know of many. --[[User:doncram|do]][[User talk:Doncram|ncr]][[Special:Contributions/doncram|am]] 20:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

== Your Revision in article "Mach Speed" (actually [[Mach number]]) ==

You recently reverted my edit in the article [[Mach Speed]]. The reason you gave makes no sense to me and I do not know what it means. [[User:AustralianPope|AustralianPope]] ([[User talk:AustralianPope|talk]]) 23:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

: Sorry, I've reverted my edit here.
: The purpose of hatnotes like that is to "rescue" readers who've searched for something but ended up in the wrong place. These hatnotes are there to link articles with similar ''names'', not articles that are about similar ''concepts''. Someone looking for [[Mach Speed Technologies]] isn't going to enter "Mach Number" instead. However there is (which I should have checked first) a [[WP:REDIRECT|redirect]] from [[Mach speed]] to [[Mach number]], so it's plausible that they could enter "Speed" but end up at "Number" (and so your hatnote would be appropriate). [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

== Sorry it spilled over onto you... ==

[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.  Thank you.--[[User:Kintetsubuffalo|Kintetsubuffalo]] ([[User talk:Kintetsubuffalo|talk]]) 03:38, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
== Clear space on Vincent article ==

ThanQ for your undo and explanation - I was more concerned about the previous changes where a blog site was introduced into this article by the site owner. I'm using a very old 4:3 laptop and my eyes are not so good now, hence I need the text zoomed, so I don't always realise what everyone else is seeing!--[[User:Rocknrollmancer|Rocknrollmancer]] ([[User talk:Rocknrollmancer|talk]]) 10:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
: It's one of those problems that only happens at some screen widths. However using the clear fixes it reliably for everyone. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:43, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
::I've also had difficulty with cache - when updating an existing image it looked the same. I ''thought'' I'd maybe uploaded the same thing again but when re-uploading with a different filename all three versions still came out the same - '''on my screen'''. That's when the penny dropped. Both newer versions were 'correct', ie. improved and different to the original which was the point of uploading them. No harm done, tiny file sizes. That's another to remember for the future 8¬) --[[User:Rocknrollmancer|Rocknrollmancer]] ([[User talk:Rocknrollmancer|talk]]) 12:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

== Kay turbine ==

Sourced by myself and new and did anybody doubt the content that turbines are also working with refrigerants like CO2 with very high vapour pressure at low temperatures in combination with centrifugal compressor instead condensor. Actually I did also reinvent the mercury turbine not knowing about it`s historical existence after found inside only english Wikipedia with predicted behavior. Also reinvented was the centrifugal compressor because not found inside german Wikipedia and Brockhaus and Yahoo searching under compressor but actually also blowers are already CFC and own type was "Fächerkammerfliehkraftkompressor" with#
side inlet that makes also pumping and sucking and a bootom with a hole inside inner chambers inside again in enclosing chamber with central outlet maybe sometimes anyway better. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.230.46.223|217.230.46.223]] ([[User talk:217.230.46.223|talk]]) 20:02, 25 March 2014 (UTC) 

== turbines ==

Explained is same sourced for new construction nand who else could not read that english
like in 1000 Wikipedia entries before and the english be improved by everybody but not the content ?! Also the mercury vapour turbine entry is by myself and sure better coal power plant than just coal plant in english. First and important special for atomic reactor security is the content with Kayturbine already inside there before and shorter with link to turbine section etc.
Looks like you are just deleting but not reading taking out also:
(about 580°C) or
"problem is that" without sentence was wrong left because of no time for finish and more coming
high [[Critical point (thermodynamics)|critical point]]
for more easy heating up undercritical, low specific heat capacity 140 J/(kg*K), low thermal conductivity 8.3 W/(m*K) for a metal not water 0,597 W/(m·K), density 13.5459 g/ccm. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/95.88.168.40|95.88.168.40]] ([[User talk:95.88.168.40|talk]]) 17:15, 26 March 2014 (UTC) 

== kayturbine and mercury turbine ==

Of course not good english beacuse adding more and more in the sentences that can be rearranged and shortend later.
Of course I`m understanding fully the mercury turbine because I did reinvent not knowing about historical existemce. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.230.34.18|217.230.34.18]] ([[User talk:217.230.34.18|talk]]) 18:36, 26 March 2014 (UTC) 
: Per my past message on one of your several talk pages, please take this to [[Talk:Turbine]] [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:35, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
:: Well, ''technically'' they followed your instructions. But I agree with your hat and edit summary that it's not terrible useful. On a related note, the poster included their email address in the talk page posting (commented out so it's not immediately visible) as well is in the attempted edits to the page.... do you think that rises to the level of needing oversighting? [[User:Sailsbystars|Sailsbystars]] ([[User talk:Sailsbystars|talk]]) 22:34, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

==Airbreathing jet engine==
Good point. Thanks Andy. Glad someone is looking at what I'm doing.[[User:Pieter1963|Pieter1963]] ([[User talk:Pieter1963|talk]]) 02:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

== [[LAURON]] ==
:: [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Destructive_editing_by_TheRedPenOfDoom]]
Andy, it looks to me that all of the content removed from this article is easily sourced based on this Google Scholar search [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%2BLAURON+%2Brobot&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 here]. Cheers. [[User:I am One of Many|I am One of Many]] ([[User talk:I am One of Many|talk]]) 05:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
: "Easily sourced" if you're firstly inclined to even try (Red Pen never does, content work is beneath him) and secondly have the time to spend improving the site (which will always take longer than simply deleting chunks). How can a well-intentioned content creator compete on speed with deletions like this, even if there is sourcing around to do so? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 09:40, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
: And as usual, closed within an hour or two. 8-( [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 09:42, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
::I'm a bit busy now, but I'll keep it on my agenda and try to source it and restore the content in a couple of weeks. Generally, robot such as this one will have a number of articles published and articles on each version as it is developed. So, you were certainly correct that non-source content should not be removed from articles on robotics unless the content seems "off" or an academic-level search yields no sources. Now that it has been shortened so much, maybe when I get around to sourcing it, I'll be able to nominate it for a DYK! Cheers.

== [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive264#RfC closure review: Mr Whoppit]] ==

Hi Andy. I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=603129832 requested] a [[Wikipedia:Closure review|closure review]] of [[Talk:Mr Whoppit#Request for comment]] at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive264#RfC closure review: Mr Whoppit]] because you disagreed with Armbrust's close and posted a closure review at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive 10#Talk:Mr Whoppit#Request for comment]].I have remained neutral as the opener of the closure review and the editor who requested closure at [[WP:ANRFC]]. Best, [[User:Cunard|Cunard]] ([[User talk:Cunard|talk]]) 10:28, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

== JB-2 Loon ==

Hi Andy. The categorisations on [[JB-2 Loon]] are IMHO inappropriate, because "JB-2 Loon" is a synonym for the [[Republic-Ford JB-2]] (in fact, "JB-2" and "Loon" are entirerely seperate designation schemes, the Army/Air Force designation "JB-2" was standalone while the "Loon" name applied only to the Navy KGW/KUW/LTV-N-2). Since the Republic-Ford JB-2 article is already in those two categories, including them on the JB-2 Loon redirect isn't necessary. - [[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] [[User talk:The Bushranger|One ping only]] 00:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
:# There is no requirement to only categorise one entry.
:# The [[WP:COMMONNAME]] for this was the 'Loon'. That redirect is the only Loon in [[:Category:Pulsejet-powered aircraft|that category]].
:# If you have an issue with 'JB-2 Loon' together, then that's a problem of naming, not categorization.
: [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
:: 1. is [[WP:COMMONSENSE]] that you don't put the same subject twice in the same category. I'd argue 2., especially with regards to the necessity of having it in that category; as for 3., good point and I'm off to RfD. - [[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] [[User talk:The Bushranger|One ping only]] 02:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
::: As a compromise, would having [[LTV-N-2 Loon]] in those categories instead of "JB-2 Loon" work? - [[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] [[User talk:The Bushranger|One ping only]] 03:00, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
::: There is no reason at all to not list the same ''name'' for an item multiple times in the same category, if those names are sufficiently different that someone reading the category would either not see them as related, or if there are multiple commonnames (as in this case) that need to be presented in such a category. It doesn't matter that they will all redirect to the same place, the category listing is about presentation of their ''names'', not their ''articles''. If the names are usefully distinct (and in this case, there's a need to present at least one discernible as 'Loon'), then they are justified to be listed. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 09:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

== Airship ==

Hi Andy,
On the [[Airship]] article, you are insisting that a blimp is distinct from an airship. Every RS I have ever seen (e.g. the Goodyear Blimp website) notes that "blimp" is a descriptive term for what is technically a non-rigid airship, and the article itself bears this out. Would you mind explaining your rationale for reverting my edit. I'd suggest opening a discussion at [[Talk:Airship]], or would you like me to start it? Many thanks. — Cheers, [[User:Steelpillow|Steelpillow]] ([[User Talk:Steelpillow|Talk]]) 10:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

: There are three uses of the word "airship" and it's important for an encyclopedia to distinguish them. It's an example where one word both encompasses the whole, and also names one distinct group within that whole. These two meanings are not the same, even though the word is. There is a group (blimps or non-rigid airships) that are 'part of'' "airships {overall}" but that also exists ''in distinction from'' "airships {rigid}". Then there is the word "airship" itself, just as a piece of lexical text.
: Encyclopedic writing requires a careful distinction between all three.
: In the case of "airships {rigid}" we have to distinguish these ''from'' blimps. In the case of "airships {overall}" the term encompasses both. As the terms are not clear to naive readers first encountering them, we often have to hint as just which meaning we're using. We should also rarely use both meanings at once! Encyclopedias are about conceptual topics, not words, and a well-structured encyclopedia will keep its "airships {rigid}" topic clearly distinct from its "airships {overall}".
: When we use the word, such as for disambiguations, then the same problem arises that it's completely unclear which term is needed and so we have to signpost both.
: In this case, although the topic was about "airships {overall}" there was still the lingusitic ambiguity that it's not obviously not referring to "airships {rigid}" instead. ''In the lexical context'' we can't just assume "blimps are a sort of airship" because it's not yet clear that we mean "airships {overall}" rather than "airships {rigid}" and so the contextual relationship between blimps and the topic (and the topic in the reader's mind, which might not even be the same one) isn't yet clearly defined.
: [[Structuralism]] considers this problem in great detail, but it's not popular bedside reading for the Aviation project. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:55, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
:: It's OK anyway, the Aviation project cabal has now decided that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Airship&curid=58005&diff=604143580&oldid=604143378 blimps are the same thing as barrage balloons]. Way to go guys. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
:::Well, it is in reliable sources like Wragg's ''Historical dictionary of aviation.'' Guess you could always take it up with him. — Cheers, [[User:Steelpillow|Steelpillow]] ([[User Talk:Steelpillow|Talk]]) 14:21, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
:::# That's a bloody useless book, fit only for those pile-em-high "book shops" you find in cheap shopping malls.
:::# Blimps are still not barrage balloons. If you have a source that says so, see #1.
::: [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:30, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

::::So clearly, the Oxford English Dictionary, Manchester University and the British Broadcasting Corporation are all bloody useless. Wow!
::::*'''blimp''', Pronunciation: /blɪmp, noun, informal, '''1''' (also Colonel Blimp) ''British'' A pompous, reactionary type of person, '''2''' A small airship or barrage balloon, '''2.1''' ''North American'' A fat person,..." Oxford English Dictionary online.[http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/blimp]
::::*Paris, M.; ''From the Wright Brothers to Top Gun: Aviation, Nationalism, and Popular Cinema'', Manchester University Press, 1995, Page 127: "A novel and highly visible form of defence was the barrage balloon, the 'blimp', flown over a potential target...."[http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uBYNAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA127]
::::*''Follow that Blimp'', WW2 People's War, BBC: "He was armed with a rifle and chasing an escaped barrage balloon which drifted overhead." [http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/14/a3277514.shtml]
::::Guess you could always take it up with them. — Cheers, [[User:Steelpillow|Steelpillow]] ([[User Talk:Steelpillow|Talk]]) 18:46, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
::::: Sometimes I do raise technical terms with the OED. Sometimes they even follow my advice. A general audience dictionary like the OED is strong on historical etymology, but it doesn't over-rule a technical term within its own field. If you really think that blimps and barrage balloons become the same thing because the OED says so, then please be happy to believe so, but stop writing an encyclopedia to repeat such a mistake. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 02:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

== still waiting ==

When you removed the previous notice [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAndy_Dingley&diff=604599294&oldid=604599235], I [[WP:AGF|assumed that you were working providing the in line citations for the challenged content that you had restored to the article with this edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hexbug&diff=604598819&oldid=604596559] and that in doing so you would be addressing the issues raised in the flags that you removed by providing non primary reliable sources that would establish the notability of the subject. Perhaps you got distracted, but I am waiting for you to either provide sources shortly or else remove the content that had been challenged and restore the flags until such time as you are able to [[WP:BURDEN|act within policy and provide the sourcing as required.]] -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom]] 01:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
: I was the one who edited to improve the content (one section at least) and add some sourcing. You immediately reverted it.
: In what way are you thus "working to improve the encyclopedia" as you so high-handedly lecture others? Yet again, your actions are more about displaying your ego and less about anything constructive. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 01:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
::following the policy [[WP:BURDEN]] is not optional. editing against policy is not improving the encyclopedia. returning an article to a promotional catalog is not improving the encyclopedia. removing clean up tags without addressing the issues identified is not improving the encyclopedia. making personal attacks against another editor is not improving the encyclopedia.
::the question is: are you going to meet your [[WP:BURDEN|policy requirement by providing inline sources]] within the next couple of hours or are you intending to revert your reinsertion of unsourced content? -- [[User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom|TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom]] 02:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

==[[Gary Gabelich]]==
The reason Gary's ancestry is not in the lede is because he is famous for setting the [[Land Speed Record]] and not his parents ethnicity. He was born and raised in southern California in the drag racing scene of the 1960's and set a world record. That world record is what the article should lead in with. This is an encyclopedia and should read like one. It is not to promote one's ethnicity. Did you believe his ethnicity was more important than his record which made him famous? You changed it back to put it in the lede instead of leaving it under of the early life section I added. I was hoping this reasoning would convince you to change it back and not edit war on IronGron's behalf. [[Special:Contributions/172.56.11.206|172.56.11.206]] ([[User talk:172.56.11.206|talk]]) 12:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

== Idiocy? ==

'''Please stop''' In case you were not aware, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ramanathan_V._Guha&oldid=604911346&diff=prev this] was rude and inappropriate. Why do you think that linking directly to a redirect is a good idea? Please use {{tl|Ping}} if you respond here. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (ko'''a'''vf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 16:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
:[[User:Koavf]], while Andy's demeanour is unacceptable, he is in the right, per [[WP:NOTBROKEN]]. I would strongly suggest that both of you stop edit-warring over it.—[[User:Kww|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww|talk]]) 17:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
::'''Source?''' What, in principle, would be a source for my change...? (This is re: the boilerplate message you just left on my talk). —[[User:Koavf|Justin (ko'''a'''vf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 20:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
::'''Clarification''' Since you've provided a follow-up on my talk... My claim is not that the company/entity/site has always been named "DMOZ" but that the thing in question is at an article which is presently entitled "DMOZ". Similarly, there is a rapper whose legal name is Sean Combs and has sometimes used the stage name "Puff Daddy" or "P. Diddy" or somesuch. If I make a link to his article, I'm just discussing this topic, not necessarily the name he used at a given juncture. And if I do make a link to text which includes "Puff Daddy" I will not link to the redirect [[Puff Daddy]] (why ''would'' I ?) but use a pipe to link directly to [[Sean Combs]]. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (ko'''a'''vf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 20:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
::: What relevance does a rapper have to anything?
::: You are making, and repeating, a series of unsourced changes that the Netscape company, commonly known as Mozilla, bought another project that was named Mozilla, ''before'' they bought it. They did not. They bought another project, ''then'' they renamed it.
::: You also seem to be unaware of redirects.
::: [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
::::'''Sure''' My reference to Sean "Puff Daddy" Combs was that there can be two+ names for the same thing. Why link [[Open Directory Project]] and not link [[NewHoo]]? Also, what exactly is the problem with <nowiki>[[DMOZ|NewHoo]]</nowiki>? I eagerly await your response. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (ko'''a'''vf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 21:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
::::: Please, you are making changes to the presented text. You are removing redirects because you seem to have some issue in case they stop working, or some other idiocy. Then you edit war to reinstate this nonsense. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
{{outdent}} I have no clue what you're going on about. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ramanathan_V._Guha&diff=prev&oldid=605035302 This] is the last edit I made. What is the problem with it, Andy? How is it "idiocy"? —[[User:Koavf|Justin (ko'''a'''vf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 21:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
:::::: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NewHoo&oldid=605075984&diff=prev really don't have a clue], do you. Stick to your rappers. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

==[[Wyndcliffe Court]]==

Absolutely beautiful set of photographs. Many thanks. [[User:KJP1|KJP1]] ([[User talk:KJP1|talk]]) 05:36, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
== OER inquiry ==
Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}}, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of [[open educational resources]] (OER) (or [[open education]]). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the [[Wikipedia:School_of_Open_course|WIKISOO]] course and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Open|WikiProject Open]]), my colleague [[User:Peteforsyth|Pete Forsyth]] and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even ''heard'' the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Xc5vpYN1EH6cWlMnuJKSofKgCrWjEQ4amyPTxPhRqzg/viewform '''brief, anonymous survey]''' before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My [[User talk:Snarfa|talk]] page awaits. Thanks for your support! - [[User:Snarfa|Sara FB]] ([[User talk:Snarfa|talk]]) 20:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

==Talkback==
{{talkback|Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 24|Category:Hydrogen rocket engines|ts=07:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)}}
[[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] [[User talk:The Bushranger|One ping only]] 07:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

== Parallel valve stems? ==

Hi, Did you, as I requested, read the argument I made on the talk page before reverting my edit (again)? Of course, I accept WP:BURDEN, but why not give an edit a chance. Your reasons "''Parallel valve stems are rare in either (as they give poor valve placement for flow), .... Stem parallelism just isn't significantly dependent on 4 vs 5 valves)"'' are questionable. Would you like to comply with WP:BURDEN in respect of those points? (The standard car 4-valve head tends to be a [[Heron head]] or a "Pent-roof" design, both with parallel stems, both of which incur the standard multi-valve benefits). [[User:Arrivisto|Arrivisto]] ([[User talk:Arrivisto|talk]]) 11:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC).

== Canberra external link ==
Andy, probably not good form to add this while still under discussion on the talk page, thanks. [[User:MilborneOne|MilborneOne]] ([[User talk:MilborneOne|talk]]) 18:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
: If the current 3:1 consensus overturns, then you will undoubtedly not hesitate to remove it from the article. ''For once'', WP gets an EL of some value added to it. Why so against it? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:18, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

== Categorization ==

Hi, Andy. 
I list here my considerations about [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turbomachinery&oldid=prev&diff=606346693 this contribution]:
* Category:Mechanical engineering and Category:Gas technologies - they are subcategories of Category:Turbomachinery, so I think it is redundant.
* Category:Turbines: Turbines are just some types ot turbomachineries, so this categorization it make no sense.
For the first point, I am not sure what is correct to do to follow the rules of en.wikipedia, while for the second point I am sure is a wrong categorization. Please let me know what you think about it. --[[User:Daniele Pugliesi|Daniele Pugliesi]] ([[User talk:Daniele Pugliesi|talk]]) 16:12, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

: Let's assume that for a general topic <math>T</math> we're agreed that it has a set of parent categories <math>\{PC\}</math>. I don't think we're disagreeing on these, for this particular case.
: If there was an article <math>A</math>, we would categorise it with all of <math>\{PC\}</math>.
: If coverage of the topic expands to several articles, we might introduce an [[WP:EPONYMOUS|eponymous category]], <math>C</math>. We will categorize that category under most of the same members of <math>\subseteq\{PC\}</math>. We will still categorize the lead article under its same categories as before; why ''should'' we change them? If their categorization was appropriate before, what relevant factor has changed? The need for readers to navigate in and out of that lead article is just the same as before. The lead article is categorized under the superset <math>\{\subseteq\{PC\} \cup C \}</math> with the eponymous cat, and that conventionally has a space for its cat sort, so as to place the lead article at its start.
: Pragmatically, we do all this because "average readers" just don't understand the distinction between articles and categories and so keeping ''both'' of these in the visible navigation paths improves usability. Even expert readers should still be able to navigate from a lead article to a parent cat in one click, not two.
: In detail, there may be some pruning of the category set for both page and category and they may differ. See [[WP:EPONYMOUS]]. Many very specific cats are appropriate to specific articles, but not to broader categories. In practice, as the category expands from one article, these may need to be removed from ''both'' the lead and the cat and they are moved to particular and specifically relevant articles within the cat, as they are written. For "Kilns", then [[:Category:History of technology]] starts out as highly important to the overall topic, but would be best placed on a [[History of kilns]] article, when available. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
::Maybe I was not clear: '''Turbines are turbomachineries''', but '''Not all the turbomachineries are turbines'''! For this reason, it is appropriate to categorize the turbines as turbomachineries, instead is not appropriate at all to categorize the pages regarding turbomachineries in general as turbines, otherwise we have also to categorize [[Chemical substance]] under the [[:category:Water]]. Do it makes sense? --[[User:Daniele Pugliesi|Daniele Pugliesi]] ([[User talk:Daniele Pugliesi|talk]]) 12:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
::::(Note: category tag fixed. [[User:DexDor|DexDor]] ([[User talk:DexDor|talk]]) 20:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC))
::: OK, if this is a question of definition or (as it seems in this case) hierarchy, then yes, I'd agree with you.
::: One thing to remember is that MediaWiki categorization is primarily navigational, not defining. There are many cases where we might include for categorization something (and usually a set or subcat) where there isn't a defining relation across each and every member of that set. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:53, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
::::Can you give me some examples, so I can persuade myself about it? --[[User:Daniele Pugliesi|Daniele Pugliesi]] ([[User talk:Daniele Pugliesi|talk]]) 14:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

==POTD notification==
[[

File:Barrow Offshore wind turbines NR.jpg|thumb|100px|right|[[Wikipedia:Picture of the day/May 2014#May 20 - Tue|POTD]]]]

Hi Andy,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture [[:File:Barrow Offshore wind turbines NR.jpg]] is due to make an appearance as [[Wikipedia:Picture of the day|Picture of the Day]] on May 20, 2014. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at [[Template:POTD/2014-05-20]]. Thank you for all of your contributions! — [[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 00:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

: I really don't need this shit. Is there any way to get it deleted once and for all? I am so tired of this bloody picture and being told over and over how crap it is. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
:*1) Consensus seems to disagree that this a "crap" picture. 2) If you want it to be deleted, you can nominate for deletion at Commons. I give 10-to-1 odds of deletion, maybe, as Commons doesn't have a "uploader request" criteria like we do. — [[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 07:42, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
::: Read the past long debate about this image and why it's necessary to edit it to be bright purple instead.

== [[Spark Plug]] Rev ==

Hi Andy,

Can you explain why you reverted my edit on spark plugs? The electrode that emits electrons would be the anode (positive current enters the anode), not the cathode. Apologies in advance if this is the incorrect method of messaging for this sort of thing.

[[User:Fromeout11|Fromeout11]] ([[User talk:Fromeout11|talk]]) 13:26, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

: First of all, on WP sourcing is paramount. Otherwise it just degenerates into "I know this is right". What's your source that states "anode"?
: Secondly, what are we disagreeing on? That it's the negative electrode and emits electrons? Or that such a negative electrode is called a [[cathode]]? Remember that this is a device consuming power, not generating it, and we're talking about an electron flow into it (down the lead and then across the gap) rather than a conventional current. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

== [[Paisley (design)]] ==

As you might know, the burden is on the editor to explain how the category is relevant to the article (preferably with reliable sources), and not on the one who challenges it. ... [[User:discospinster|'''disco''''''''spinster''''']] [[User talk:discospinster|'''talk''']] 17:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
: We also have policies on edit-warring and constructive editing. If it offends you so much, you're welcome to expand it as much as you like. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:55, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
::I don't see any edit warring. And there's no reason for me to expand the article when the issue is a category that doesn't necessarily belong there. ... [[User:discospinster|'''disco''''''''spinster''''']] [[User talk:discospinster|'''talk''']] 19:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

==Changes reverted==

Could you please tell me the reason why you reverted my changes to [[Components of jet engines]] ? I have been a WP since 2004 and this is useful link, not a spam, thanks [[User:Khalid hassani|Khalid hassani]] ([[User talk:Khalid hassani|talk]]) 16:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
: In what way does the unsourced, unreliable and basically ''trivial'' content from about.com (any topic) meet [[WP:EL]]? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:06, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

== [[Radiator (engine cooling)]] ==

Since you seem to disagree with my disambiguation of the term [[overheating]] as used in this article, it would be great if you could fix the link. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|'''''bd2412''''']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 23:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
: I've redlinked it. We have no article on overheating.
:: Thanks! I'd be glad to help put together an article on engine overheating. [[User:BD2412|'''''bd2412''''']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:42, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

==[[:Category:Wikipedia_files_with_unknown_source]]==

As you seem to be more experienced, perhaps you could cast a cautious over these with a view to 'rescuing' some of them?[[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 12:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

== DYK for truss girder bridges/lattice bridges ==
{{more|Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Another_dud_DYK}}
I'm only a software engineer and an electrical engineer, not a civil engineer (I can be a very uncivil engineer at times!) but I think your five points here have hit the nail on the <s>thumb</s>head, sorry to quote your own words but as you said (mine indented, technically incorrect but trying for once to be as brief as you have done:

:From an engineering standpoint, it's hard to see how DYK could be designed to be any worse.
:*Only use new and unreviewed content
::*The five-day limit encourages that.
:*Favour content from a single author
::*One cannot, and the Wikimedia Privacy Policy does not allow (can't find section), contributions to be jointly attributed. This is not simply a problem for engineering articles but e.g. translations: my wife and I typically translate from Hungarian to English, or vice versa, together since she is native in one and I in the other: jointly we may check a third or fourth language if in doubt.When I have mentioned that my wife contributed, another editor has complained that I have been "bragging that I have a wife", when of course it is just giving joint attribution just as an author thanks contributors on the preface/acknowledgements on a book: if I was legally tied at the altar I can be tied on Wikipedia, and so can [[joint and several liability|any other group contribution]] be tied together if Wikimedia let you: I know man do because I can see the difference in style between individuals; if they go through the same routers (e.g. housemates) it is almost impossible for WP to tell; so it is a matter of personal honesty. I have on occasion accidentally written on [[User:Monkap]]'s name not realising she wa logged on, but I will tend to revert that and reassign to mine ''exactly for that reason''. I am sure we are not the only collective editors on the whole Wikipedia.</s>
:*Deliberately avoid the subject competent or knowledgeable, particularly article authors
::*Probably covered by above point. [[WP:PRIMARY]], [[WP:RS]] also implies this.
:*Incentivise production of more DYKs, as fast as possible
::*...and discincentivise their review by new or occasional contributors: QPQ is too onerous after a long slog on an article.
:*Ignore DYK quality
::*Implicitly, with no policy but how it seems to be, [[WP:BOLD]] is outlawed at DYK. It isn't at [[WP:RFD]] (I have translated French articles into English and the R goes speed close) nor at [[WP:AFD]] nor [[WP:CSD]] even.This is [[WP:NOTFINISHED]], so DYK is '''directly gainsaying''' that policy. [[WP:WIKIBREAK]] also comes into play. I give you this so that the editor who said "which policy", you have at least the latter two, but I think all four.</s> But don't fix anything you as reviewer find wrong: which is not what happens at [[WP:GA]] or [[WP:FA]] and so on: reviewers don't just point out errors, minor ones are fixed so as not to waste time (as I am no doubt doing). [[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]])

I agree entirely: or rather we should have their opposites stated as clearly on DYK's guidelines as you do above.

===More verbose discussion of these but you can skip it ===
The last two might be combined. I'd happily bung in to a WP:ESSAY with you on this. I write very "hooky" (another author said) DYKs but the are technically correct and referenced, just that they draw you in like a [[cryptic crossword]] or other [[riddle]] does, the surface meaning is deliberately misleading but none is inaccurate, all are well-referenced. I don't have the privilege to be a civil engineer: I am only an uncivil one (software, electronics) but it is bizarre that you, whatever the letters after your name might be (or not, you might have an enormous stash of Railway Modelling for all I know), are patently from your clear prose and reasoning, are by WP's policies ''less'' entitled to write about it than I am, who can't walk over a bridge without falling off it. That policy comes essentially from [[WP:RS]] and [[WP:PRIMARY]] but of ''course'' people write about what they know: and the encyclopaedia would not get very far if they didn't.

For example, I translated [[Josiah Marshall Heath]] in late January 2014 ago and got him to DYK, he patented addition of manganize oxide to crucible steel, but I have never been happy with that DYK since the article was tagged as needing translation from French, which I did, but the quotes are back-translations from the French. Now, I know how to translate French but have never heard about him before – but with an expert in iron and steel it can get scrubbed and improved but then wouldn't meet DYK since that would take the expert some time to look it up and the DYK deadline would likely be exceeded (5 days). I don't know how much you know about the founding of ferrous metals, but I should be very grateful if you would cast your <s>iron</s>eye over it and if I have any obvious mistakes, or you can find better references, I should be delighted. I tried to look up the patent in English but it does not appear to be online – so back-translated the French into kinda Dickensian English as best I could manage. If nothing else, it is more grist to your mill that I think I was the only contributor (there have been a couple of bot or tool edits since but no content changes to speak of). It's better to have the article and reasonably referenced than not at all, but if those doing the [[blue pencil (editing)]] bothered to check up they might find better than I managed.

I am sorry I pack the maximum amount of words into the minimum amount of thought. Best wishes; I do see your name from time to time as I gnome about, but I tend to gnome elsewhere now exactly ''because'' of your stated reasons for DYK. The Heath one I got "This is your last freebie": Hang on, I thought ''everyone's'' contributions here at WP were made freely? I didn't realise I now had a WP overdraft. In my opinion I think the "QPQ" results in a backlog: one spends days – sometimes weeks – writing an article or series of them, getting pictures, doing cartography, technical drawings or whatever and then is told as a penance one has to do a review of someone else's and at ''exactly'' the time that one has just finished an article (well [[WP:NOTFINISHED]] exactly but done one's own [[blue pencil (editing)]] and so on, checked the referneces, gone down the library etc) and then O but you have to do it all again now. That is ''exactly'' the time one needs a [[WP:WIKIBREAK]] to do the washing up, feed the cat, bury the grandmother, and so on.

One thing you didn't mention –
*The DYK 5-day time limit for new contributions ''encourages'' both editors and reiewers to be hasty. [[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]]) 21:04, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, as Pascal said, "I have only made this letter longer since I have not had time to make it shorter". "Brevity is the soul of all wit" and stuff like that, but I am on your side but didn't want to introduce all my verbiage into an already-too-long discussion at WP:DYK when you are

<large>PATENTLY RIGHT</large>.

[[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]]) 21:10, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

:::I am so sorry to ramble, but [[Andrew Lang]] said "he uses arguments as a drunk uses a lamp-post, not so much for illumination as for support"? I am giving you some arguments more that I have had four [[gin and tonic|G and T]]s while I have written what amounts to a very bad first draft on an essa, in your support. Anything you want to quote from it at the DYK go ahead, but I thought it better to put it first here because you may disagree and certainly can hone. [[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]]) 21:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

* Thanks Si, I doubt if anything will happen with DYK, as those who own it are so tightly wedded to proving that everyone else are merely [[suppressive person]]s, rather than looking at what's going wrong with it (See [[User_talk:Rjccumbria#.22an_unhealthy_interest_in_the_Victorians.27_use_of_iron_in_railway_structures.22|User talk:Rjccumbria]] re the problems that the perverse incentive of Wikicup causes for it). I've never liked DYK, but I could happily ignore it if it wasn't such a direct route onto the main page (with all the past potential for spammed abuse that has caused). Roger Bamkin seems more keen on shooting the messenger than anything else. Another brief conversation in Chepstow last night turned into "So, who do we pay to buy our Wikipedia coverage?" yet again. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:03, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
== May Head ==

Hi, Andy. I just saw your edit (revert) on [[Jaguar V12 engine]] and realized that I don't know much about May Head. I agree describing it a stratified charge is inaccurate, but is "high swirl" more accurate than "squish" or "high squish"? Is his description on patent papers (was it patented?) the issue here, or the combustion chamber actually create a strong swirl or many of them? Could you enlighten me? I don't even know if the distinction between swirl and squish existed at the time, and I would think a proper observation/analysis method did not exist. Further, I'd think the uncontrolled creation of many micro-swirls in a turbulence by squish is a different concept (now) to creating a strong or many (more or less controlled) swirls. [[User:Yiba|Yiba]] ([[User talk:Yiba|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Yiba|contribs]]) 00:10, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
: [[Swirl (piston engine)|Swirl]] and [[squish (piston engine)|squish]] , as we know them today, date from [[Harry Ricardo|Ricardo]]'s work in the '20s. To understand the ''history'' here, you really do have to read a few volumes of Ricardo.
: Swirl and squish are different. However some not-infrequent head designs (and this is one) use squish to produce high swirl in a suitably shaped combustion chamber. Others don't, they do it instead just with tangential flow from the ports. Squish-to-swirl designs are usually bowl-in-piston designs, typically the Saurer-style double-circulation toroid for a direct injection diesel. Revolutionary in its day, common from the '60s onwards. Most of the petrol bowl-in-piston designs are also there so that squish gets converted into swirl, but they're a simpler bowl shape, not the toroid.
: It's the same for May's 'Fireball' head in the '81 Jag HE. An unusual shape (I can't think of another similar) as it's all happening in the head, not the piston (AIUI, there just isn't enough depth in the piston above the crankpin). It's not merely an efficient design, it's very much the result of its circumstances: take an existing engine and radically change it, but don't cost much in terms of re-engineering it. Even the camshaft and valve actuation stays in place! For an engine that began as a sports car engine at the profligate time of high-octane 5 star petrol, it's remarkable that when it was re-designed for better mid-throttle efficiency at the end of the '70s, the compression ratio ''rose''. This wasn't needed in the '60s – performance was everything, not efficiency. It ''could'' have been achieved in the '60s, but only with high octane and following aircraft engine practice – probably twin plugs. Doing it without chemistry needed genius and the sort of smarter engine management that was beginning to be available (at a cost and with hideous long-term unreliability) at the start of the '80s. In essence, it's a 1920s design - pure Ricardo, more than ever seen elsewhere. If you get a small and well shaped combustion chamber, then swirl the bejeezus out of it, you can work wonders.
: Sadly it's not an engine I know too well. I think I've only ever had the heads off one of them. I worked on ECU software for them at one time but even the serious tuners (TWR) left the head largely alone, there just wasn't much scope to improve it.
: As to stratified charge, it's nonsense. I did work on the edges of the great late-80s snake oil scam (I designed dyno systems) and some companies fell for it, but not Jag. I suspect it has arisen by recursive wikisourcing from the [[Michael May (racing driver)]] article, which needs fixing but it's too late for me tonight.
: What's the best book out there as a technical history of the Jag V12 lump ? I haven't time to read it, but that never stops me buying yet more books. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 01:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

::Thank you very much as always. I have owned/used a 6L version for the last 10 years or so, but never have learned the details of '81 HE version or about May's contribution to it. As the 6L is known to be one of the toughest engines to pull the heads (seems the gasket has some "glueing" properties) without a specifically made puller contraption, I am hoping that I won't have to pull them in the foreseeable future.

::One of the better materials on the history of Jag V12 seems the 12 pages following: http://www.jagweb.com/jagworld/v12-engine/ with a strong caution that I suspect if the author, a Roger Bywater, ever had training on mechanical engineering beyond being a good mechanic working in the engine development dept at Jag, and seems to show dubious (or, lacking) understanding of the theories behind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPxpPYLW4kw is an interesting interview on Walter Hassan and Harry Mundy, the link to it I have added to [[Jaguar V12 engine]], in which the bowl in piston squish (intended or not) arrangement of the original 5.3L version is shown. [[User:Yiba|Yiba]] ([[User talk:Yiba|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Yiba|contribs]]) 10:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

==[[Hackerspace]]==
Nicely done about the issue with men's shed being usined as a synomyn - didn't understand that until you pointed it out - so THANKS!!! [[User:X-mass|X-mass]] ([[User talk:X-mass|talk]]) 04:46, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

== Rocket engine categories ==

Hi Andy, I was looking at [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_24#Category:Hydrogen_rocket_engines]] to close it, but I could not figure out whether you oppose the longer form "Rocket engines using xxx propellant". Would you mind making your position clearer there? – [[User:Fayenatic london|Fayenatic]] '''[[Special:Contributions/Fayenatic london|L]]'''[[User talk:Fayenatic london|ondon]] 05:15, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
:In the absence of any further clarification, I closed it as Rename to that form. – [[User:Fayenatic london|Fayenatic]] '''[[Special:Contributions/Fayenatic london|L]]'''[[User talk:Fayenatic london|ondon]] 14:16, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

== [[Talk:Version control#Requested move 27 May 2014]] ==

Perhaps you could weigh in your comments here again. Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/50.53.15.59|50.53.15.59]] ([[User talk:50.53.15.59|talk]]) 01:08, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
== H - drive ==
Thanks for the tip on your update. Nice job mate!!
Regards Hans
[[Special:Contributions/86.92.147.4|86.92.147.4]] ([[User talk:86.92.147.4|talk]]) — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 17:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC) 

== [[Royal Gunpowder Mills, Waltham Abbey]] ==

When did [[WP:MOS]] start saying that redirects shouldn't be categorized? Also, please read [[WP:BRD]]. It's not B, R, R-again-because-you-know-you're-really-right. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 23:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

:Thank you for your message - in light of your tone, can you please read [[WP:AGF]]. The WP:MOS note re cats on redirect pages came in over 2 years ago. I used to add cats onto such, but someone who was trying to be an admin quickly pointed out the change to me. Secondly, the categories that you are trying to add back are all presently listed in the article to which the redirect points to. Hence, both the redirect and the actual article are listed in all three cats (where I found the problem/hence removed the cats from the redirect). The WP:MOS directive says that you should only add cats if the redirect name adds to the wider categorisation of the subject. As the three cats are replicated, what's the point? Hope that you understand hence why I removed them, and see no sense on either a WP:MOS or logical level to add them back. Rgds, --[[User:Trident13|Trident13]] ([[User talk:Trident13|talk]]) 10:39, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

== [[Key Performance Parameters]] ==

The creator of this article doesn't seem to realise that these aren't unique to the UD DoD. I'm not sure what to do about it. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 12:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)a
: As far as I'm aware (which is negligible), they ''are'' unique to the DoD and its partners. Everyone else calls them KPIs. There is some question as to whether they even are strictly parameters (i.e. an independent and prescribed requirement) or rather they're indicators (a measured performance).
: DoD KPP is a narrow niche article, but I think it's a valid one (ie WP:N). There should probably be relevant linkage between the two though. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
::[[User:Andy Dingley]] - take a look at [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&num=100&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Key+performance+parameters%22] and [https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Key+Performance+Parameters&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&sourceid=Mozilla-search&start=0&gws_rd=ssl#hl=en&q=%22Key+Performance+Parameters%22+-army+-navy+-military&safe=off&tbm=bks]. I find a number of uses. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 14:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

== Accusations of WP:SOCK ==

Per your most recent comment at [[WP:NFCR]] (and many previous comments there as well) please discontinue accusing other editors of being a [[WP:SOCK]] of {{User|Betacommand}}. You've been doing this for too many years, against multiple editors, and frankly it is becoming a personal attack on various editors to be calling them as such. If you truly believe and editor to be using a second account inappropriately, please don't hesitate to open a [[WP:SPI]]. Further unsubstantiated accusations will be treated as personal attacks and will be handled accordingly. '''''[[User:TLSuda|TLSuda]]''''' ([[User talk:TLSuda|talk]]) 19:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

: Why do you continue to support the overt socking of a long-banned user? Betacommand is Werieth. No-one seriously disputes this, but a number of admins who either share his view of NFC, or at least find him a convenient stooge for bad-hand operations, find it convenient to permit him to continue. Some of these admins even go so far as to block other editors on sight, as soon as they post substantiating evidence of Betacommand being Werieth. Wikipedia-l recognises this, even Wikipediocracy recognises this. Please, when you're threatening me with a block for disagreeing with your convenient status quo, at least be honest enough to say so. This has been raised at SPI repeatedly already and discussion there is stifled by either saying "no evidence!" or by blocking the editors who post such evidence. ''Repeatedly.''
: Why are you supporting this banned editor? You must admit, he's a convenient stooge for ''your own'' position on NFC. Are you a wandering independent editor seeing a poor innocent slighted? Or are you someone whose editing history is already deeply intertwined with Werieth and his NFC issues?
: Why are you supporting an editor who right now is at NFCR mis-representing our clear policy to push his "delete everything" agenda; as is his only form of editing, as was Betacommand's only form of editing.
: As to accusations of socking, then I don't believe I've ever wrongly accused an editor of socking. I don't believe I've ever accused any editor, other than Betacommand / Werieth thus far, of socking who hasn't ''then been blocked as a sock'' per community consensus. You're right, I don't like socking. However I'm actually quite reluctant to throw such accusations around and have, if anything, a track record of excusing other editors when accused as socks, until the evidence is overwhelming and damning (as it is for Betacommand / Werieth). As to your allegations of "too many years" (and "multiple editors"), then I'd not even heard of Werieth until October or so last year, and I kept thankfully well away from Betacommand and his other acknowledged socks. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
::I'm not supporting anyone, but I'm frankly disappointed in you. The next time you claim someone is an sock of Betacommand without evidence and without opening an [[WP:SPI]], I will take action as you are blatantly harassing and attacking other editor(s). This is your final warning. '''''[[User:TLSuda|TLSuda]]''''' ([[User talk:TLSuda|talk]]) 23:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
::: And yet your other Betacommand-supporting NFC-opposed admin immediately blocks every user who ''does'' post the evidence against Werieth.
::: I had thought you were better than them, evidently you're just the same. You're both just a bully whose first reaction is to threaten other editors, not to consider the evidence you've repeatedly been shown (and then blanked or revdeled).
::: Why are you supporting this banned editor? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:29, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

==DYK nomination of Eat Frozen Pork==
[[Image:Symbol question.svg|25px]] Hello! Your submission of [[Eat Frozen Pork]] at the [[Template talk:DYK|Did You Know nominations page]] has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath '''[[Template:Did you know nominations/Eat Frozen Pork|your nomination's entry]]''' and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  [[User:Hasteur|Hasteur]] ([[User talk:Hasteur|talk]]) 20:44, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

== [[:Category:American films]] ==

I thought the same thing about the category and appropriate subcategories, but they've got a hatnote at the top of the listing -- all American films get put in the category "for convenience". – [[User:Srich32977|S. Rich]] ([[User talk:Srich32977|talk]]) 20:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
: OK, I'm rather surprised as that must make for one enormous and unwieldy category! [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
::Yup! 20,000+ – [[User:Srich32977|S. Rich]] ([[User talk:Srich32977|talk]]) 21:39, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

== Efficiency [[internal combustion engine]] ==

Hello Andy.

I just changed some lines in the page "Internal combustion engine". According to my own calculations and a refference website, the efficiency of a diesel engine can be over 60%. Why is there written on the page that is is only 20%?

My calculation:
I have a 1 kW diesel generator that uses 0,35 liter/hour. In other units, it uses 0,35 liter/hour to produce 3,6 MJ of electricity. With an energy value of diesel of 17,447 MJ/liter, 6,106 MJ of diesel is needed to produce 3,6 MJ of electricity. This makes an efficiency of 59%.

The website:
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph240/goldenstein2/

[[User:Ruudburger|Ruudburger]] ([[User talk:Ruudburger|talk]]) 14:19, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

: This belongs at [[Talk:internal combustion engine]], not on a user page
: You're citing an undergraduate course paper as [[WP:RS]]. It's not reliable, it's certainly not well written.
: That paper confuses Carnot's idealised heat engine with a practical internal combustion engine. It's an inappropriate comparison to then take that and present it as if "a competently efficient IC engine ought to be approaching the Carnot figure". At the very most, ''only'' the work-doing expansion part of the IC engine cycle might approach this (ignoring mechanical losses). As the IC cycle also has to include combustion, gas flow and compression processes, before even reaching the start point of any comparable Carnot cycle, then this is unrealistic. Also citing Carnot's efficiency limit as being a magical 83% figure is to misunderstand it. That's only the limit for a combustion temperature of 1723K. If the combustion process gives a lower temperature, then this gives a lower Carnot limit. Yet engine efficiency as an engineering proceeds in both directions: hotter engines with better Carnot limits (and more difficult engineering) and also lower burn temperatures that achieve more efficient combustion to achieve a greater proportion of what's a lower Carnot limit. Modern engines are chasing both these goals. Yet to present Carnot as a simple limit on IC engines is a gross over-simplification, especially at this point in the article.
: This article needs improvement certainly. Thermodynamics on WP is generally OK in pure science articles, falling apart when it comes to engineering applications. Such improvement needs a better basis than a lazy student paper though. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Andy for the detailed reply! I am new here in editing, but I like to do more in future. When I was reading the page "Internal combustion engine", I was confused about the efficiency part. That's why I edited it after some research. But I am not a professional, so I hope someone else can improve that part by extending it.

[[User:Ruudburger|Ruudburger]] ([[User talk:Ruudburger|talk]]) 22:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
== Fred Copeman ==
Hi Andy

Thank you for your words of wisdom. I would have no problem with the removal of NFC image that I had included in the list, and would not have minded it being removed from my sandbox following some dialog with the objector. What I object to is the complete absence of good faith which Stefan2 has shown me. He should be the one threatened with a block for his behaviour. He should be reminded that an article being prepared in a sandbox is a draught and may not actually be created as an article. I will in future check the licence of any image I include as I have no wish to get involved in a dispute with people like Stefan2.[[User:Cheeseladder|Cheeseladder]] ([[User talk:Cheeseladder|talk]]) 09:51, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

== Steam Injector ==

Please contribute to the [[Talk:Injector#Steam injector|discussion on steam injectors]]! You have reverted my changes to the article, but I cannot find any explaination in which way steam injectors take advantage of the latent heat released by condensation (except for preheating the water)! –[[User:Hokanomono|Hokanomono]] [[User_talk:Hokanomono|✉]] 08:50, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
: This isn't to do with [[injector]]s in general, but specifically for the [[Henri Giffard|Giffard]] [[boiler feedwater injector]]. This manages the "impossible" trick of injecting water under pressure by using a ''lower'' supply pressure than that in the boiler (or at least, one that is no higher). The extra energy needed to achieve this comes from condensing some of the steam supplied to drive the injector, releasing its [[latent heat]]. Incidentally it's well-known that locomotive injectors stop working with hot feedwater - the reason (far less commonly known) is that they're now too hot to condense some of the supply steam and thus release the energy needed.
: Unfortunately WP has lost the previous article on boiler feedwater injectors, as one editor took it upon themselves to rewrite [[injector]] from the narrow POV of the chemical industry, and the assumption that a supply pressure can always be available which is higher than the delivery pressure needed. The current article is now unreadable, inaccurate and unsourced crap, guarded by a dedicated edit warrior.
: If you're after a technical discussion of feedwater injectors, I'd suggest Semmens & Goldfinch's ''How Steam Locomotives Really Work'' as one of the most recent and probably most accurate explanations. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
:: Evidently WP's a good platform for publicising their self-published book though: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fundamentals of Stack Gas Dispersion]] [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
:: Your second change is quite wrong too. The purpose of this excess energy (and why it's needed at all) is to increase the pressure of the injector delivery, such that it exceeds the boiler pressure. It has nothing to do with preheating the feedwater. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:39, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Let's continue the discussion at [[Talk:Injector#Steam injector]] --[[User:Hokanomono|Hokanomono]] [[User_talk:Hokanomono|✉]] 08:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

== DYK for Eat Frozen Pork ==

{{tmbox
|type = notice
|image = [[Image:Updated DYK query.svg|15px|Updated DYK query]]
|text = On [[Wikipedia:Recent_additions#17 June 2014|17 June 2014]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[Eat Frozen Pork]]''''', which you recently nominated. {{#if: |The nomination discussion and review may be seen at [[]].|{{#ifexist:Template:Did you know nominations/Eat Frozen Pork|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at [[Template:Did you know nominations/Eat Frozen Pork]].|{{#ifexist:Template talk:Did you know/Eat Frozen Pork|The nomination discussion and review may be seen at [[Template talk:Did you know/Eat Frozen Pork]].}} }} }} You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ([[User:Rjanag/Pageview stats|here's how]], [https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikiviewstats/index.php?page=Eat_Frozen_Pork&datefrom=2014-06-01&dateto=2014-06-31 live views], [http://stats.grok.se/en/201406/Eat_Frozen_Pork daily totals]), and it may be added to [[Wikipedia:Did you know/Statistics|the statistics page]] if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|Did you know talk page]].
}} ''[[User: Allen3|Allen3]]'' [[User talk:Allen3|talk]] 13:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

==Disambiguation link notification for June 19==

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Chatterley Whitfield]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Engine house]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Chatterley_Whitfield|check to confirm]] | [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Chatterley_Whitfield|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 08:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

==[[MOS:DAB]] ([[Old Dock (disambiguation)]]) ==
[[Wikipedia:MOSDAB#Where_piping_may_be_appropriate]]

''When the link is part of the description, rather than the actual entry name, piping can be used more freely. However, the text of the link should still be very similar to the title of the target article''

Can you spot what is wrong with what you did :

'''The Old Dock, Hull in Kingston upon Hull, England .. '''

hint -repetition of the town's name-[[User:Prof.Haddock|Prof.Haddock]] ([[User talk:Prof.Haddock|talk]]) 00:38, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

: In a disambig between three things, all called "Old Dock"? We need those disambiguators to be visible. Copyedit it so that the city name isn't repeated if you wish (although the city isn't called Hull and the short form wasn't even in common use at the time of this dock), but presenting the undisambiguated version of the names on a disambiguation page makes the whole page rather pointless.
: Besides which, there are two other errors in the version you've now 3RRed. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
::Prof.Haddock, also note that the link there is not part of the description, so piping should not be used. -- [[User:JHunterJ|JHunterJ]] ([[User talk:JHunterJ|talk]]) 10:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

== Prime mover ==

A [[Prime mover (locomotive)]], as shown in the article, is rather too large to fit under the floor of the likes of a [[Budd Rail Diesel Car]]. The article should mention and show the smaller [[diesel engine]]s to be found under the floors of [[railcar]]s. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
: They're still prime movers though, whatever their size. As they're normally beneath the floor, it's also hard to find clear photos of them.[[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

== Duplicate categorizing with a redirect ==
Hello,

[[Variable valve timing]] is the main article in the [[:Category:Variable valve timing]] category. [[Continuous variable valve timing]] used to be a separate article but it was merged into the other article but it still had the same category so I removed the redundant categorization. My thinking is that, since both entries in the category will go to the same place, it doesn't aid navigation and adds clutter.

Can you give me a little background on why you reverted that edit? Are you looking to expand that redirect to be a separate article again?

Thanks.
[[User:RevelationDirect|RevelationDirect]] ([[User talk:RevelationDirect|talk]]) 02:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

: The point about categorization is that it's primarily for ''finding'' things, less for worrying about where they end up. We have two concepts, VVT & CVVT, and readers can be looking for what content we have on either. If we have any content on CVVT, even enough for a small section in another article and so enough to justify a redirect, then that's enough to justify publicising that inbound link by categorizing it. If the concepts or names vary (the aspect that's visible in the category), then we justify having them both in the category, even if they land up at sections within the same article.
: Obviously the VVT articles are all a bit thin at present and could still use a lot of expansion all round.
: Also I've opposed the merge of [[variator (variable valve timing)]] and [[variable valve lift]] – variators change the timing, not the lift. These are quite different things. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 08:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

:: Thanks for clarifying. I withdrew the article merger proposal based on your clarification. As for listing the same article more than once in the same category, we'll have to agree to disagree. Thanks. [[User:RevelationDirect|RevelationDirect]] ([[User talk:RevelationDirect|talk]]) 03:00, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Barnett (2nd nomination)]] ==

Hi Andy Dingley. Because you participated in [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 19#Jacob Barnett]], you may be interested in [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Barnett (2nd nomination)]]. [[User:Cunard|Cunard]] ([[User talk:Cunard|talk]]) 16:50, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

== [[Widnes-Runcorn Transporter Bridge]] ==

I should have thought that an editor of your experience would apply [[WP:V]] to your work. Ref 16 is "dead" and Ref 17 still gives the address of Transporter House on its website. And let's face it, Transporter House is hardly relevant to an article on the bridge, is it? If so, and if it is notable, it should maybe have its own separate article or stub. As a matter of interest, do you have any special connection with the bridge or the office? --[[User:Peter I. Vardy|Peter I. Vardy]] ([[User talk:Peter I. Vardy|talk]]) 10:50, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
: I think you need to look at our standards for "temporary" notability (it isn't) a bit more closely.
: You made the newbie error of blanking references because their host website had since 404'ed, which you then compounded by blanking the para they supported. We don't do this, we tag refs with {{tl|dead link}} and then (or simultaneously) we see if they're recoverable. Both of these were trivially so. It took me less time to do this useful minor task than it did to revert your edit warring and pointless argument here.
: If the situation has changed, then by all means ''update'' the statement about the current state of the bridge. That might use these refs, it might not. However blanking sections because of a 404 is never the way to progress forwards.
: I do not have any special connection with either the bridge, Runcorn or the YMCA. Nor am I required to have them before editing this article. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
::Of course not, but I just wondered why you expended so much trouble on a peripheral aspect relating to what was once a rather important structure. Anyway thanks for updating Ref 16. But the current refs do not say that it "is no longer in use". I suppose that by adding [http://www.haltonymca.org.uk/halton-ymca-history.html this] you could say, by exclusion, that it is no longer in use. What do you think? --[[User:Peter I. Vardy|Peter I. Vardy]] ([[User talk:Peter I. Vardy|talk]]) 18:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
:::On second thoughts, let's go back to the beginning. This is an article about a bridge. Our debate is about a building. The article says it was a former office building for the bridge - so what? Where does the reference say that? It was used by the Halton YMCA, but isn't now - so what? Ref 16 confirms it was used by the YMCA; what confirms it isn't used now?
:::I deleted the sentence, not because of the dead link (only ref 16 was dead; ref 17 is still alive, and you had no need to "retrieve" it from archive), but because of its irrelevance to the article, IMO, (and also compounded by the dead link). I did not delete it because of the 404. I am just as capable as you of retrieving dead links, and the reference to "newbie" is <s>snotty</s> under the belt. I am also aware of the {{tl|dead link}} template.
:::You have no interest to the bridge, Runcorn, or the YMCA. I do have an interest in the first two, and respect the work of the last. But where the YMCA was located, and isn't now, is hardly of relevance to the Transporter Bridge. In conclusion I disagree with you. I see no point in retaining this sentence. It adds nothing to the information about the subject of the article, it's pretty irrelevant anyway, and despite amending the references, they still do not confirm all that is in the sentence. --[[User:Peter I. Vardy|Peter I. Vardy]] ([[User talk:Peter I. Vardy|talk]]) 20:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
::::The relevant sentence in the article is now "properly" referenced, and IMO looks silly. As it is irrelevant anyway, I intend to delete it (again), unless you can persuade me otherwise. --[[User:Peter I. Vardy|Peter I. Vardy]] ([[User talk:Peter I. Vardy|talk]]) 16:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

== [[Theremin]] ==

Hi Andy,

Pls do let me know the reason for removing the edits that I had created in the Theremin>>TV section.

Thanks,
Nishant — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nishantkashyap23|Nishantkashyap23]] ([[User talk:Nishantkashyap23|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nishantkashyap23|contribs]]) 12:49, 1 July 2014 (UTC) 
: Did you read the vast past discussion of this on the talk: page? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:39, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

No can you pls direct me to that page? Thanks — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nishantkashyap23|Nishantkashyap23]] ([[User talk:Nishantkashyap23|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nishantkashyap23|contribs]]) 07:05, 2 July 2014 (UTC) 

Hi Andy, your response is very vague - I am not sure which page you are talking about - would be great if you can be more specific...thanks — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nishantkashyap23|Nishantkashyap23]] ([[User talk:Nishantkashyap23|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nishantkashyap23|contribs]]) 07:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC) 
:{{tps}} {{replyto|Nishantkashyap23}} Since the article is [[Theremin]], its talk page is [[Talk:Theremin]]; and on that, I find the thread [[Talk:Theremin#Big Bang theory]] which covers much of this matter. BTW please [[WP:SIGN|sign your posts]], either by typing four [[tilde]]s (~), like this: <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>, or by clicking the signature icon: [[File:Insert-signature.png|link=|alt=]]. --[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 12:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!!--[[User:Nishantkashyap23|Nishantkashyap23]] ([[User talk:Nishantkashyap23|talk]]) 08:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

== Keeping you in the loop ==

There's a few things in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FSashaKahn&diff=615302438&oldid=615191331 this] post that you're probably interested in. [[User:GoFormer|GoFormer]] ([[User talk:GoFormer|talk]]) 14:47, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

== ANI ==

[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.  Thank you. [[User:Werieth|Werieth]] ([[User talk:Werieth|talk]]) 15:29, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

== Blocked ==

As I now notice your recent behaviour has been in obvious contravention of a very clear final warning given you by yet another uninvolved administrator less than a month ago [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Andy_Dingley&diff=611749675&oldid=611738769], I have gone ahead in accordance with his warning and blocked you for harassment, for one week. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 16:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

: I have unblocked you early, because the issue appears in the meantime to have become moot – Werieth has been blocked as a sock on the basis of new evidence. Note that, even though this may look as if it proves you right in retrospect, this unblock does not come as a sign of your vindication – it is still true that your behaviour, of persistently casting aspersions without such new evidence and of enabling and supporting obvious harassment socks, was reprehensible and deserved sanctions, so the block was justified at the time it was done. It's just that at the present time there's no point for it to continue further, so having it run on would be merely punitive. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 14:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

== Model engineering ==

Thanks Andy, for your thanks on my [[Model engineering]] edits. So far nobody has slapped a notification banner across the top for unreferenced material. Perhaps it is not on a regular policing beat because of the (slightly harsh?) Low-importance_Metalworking_articles rating. Hopefully the article can move from C-Class_Metalworking_articles to B-Class_Metalworking_articles. Though I wouldn't even know how, despite any conflict of interest I would have. [[User:Stringybark|Stringybark]] ([[User talk:Stringybark|talk]]) 23:00, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

==Thanks==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|[[File:Original Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]|[[File:Original Barnstar.png|100px]]}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For maintaining the courage of your convictions. The SPI process did not work in the current situation and that had to be frustrating. While you may have overstepped and certainly incurred the wrath of those who thought you did, you didn't flinch. Ultimately, the truth became known and your position, while not fully excused, was vindicated. Thanks for demonstrating courage, hopefully lessons have been learned by all involved. [[User:Carrite|Carrite]] ([[User talk:Carrite|talk]]) 15:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
|}

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | It seems vindication looks different from different points of view. (Also, what Tim said.) --[[User:Demiurge1000|Demiurge1000]] ([[User_talk:Demiurge1000|talk]]) 16:10, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
|}

Yes Andy, sorry to see you banned for being correct [[User:Mosfetfaser|Mosfetfaser]] ([[User talk:Mosfetfaser|talk]]) 19:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png|100px]]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | For going above and beyond the call of duty to expose a notorious sockpuppeteer. [[User:MinoanX|MinoanX]] ([[User talk:MinoanX|talk]]) 19:40, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
|}
*{{+1}} -- [[User:Michael Bednarek|Michael Bednarek]] ([[User talk:Michael Bednarek|talk]]) 11:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

== Rewrite on Lithium polymer battery ==

I rewrote basically the entire article of [[lithium polymer battery]], adding several references. I saw that you posted in the talk page so perhaps you have some interest in this. The page covers the [[lithium ion]] technology, as opposed to the "true" polymer-electrolyte technology, which is mentioned but only briefly. In my opinion, much needs to be done in the [[lithium ion]] article as well.----[[Special:Contributions/137.132.22.191|137.132.22.191]] ([[User talk:137.132.22.191|talk]]) 02:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

==Move proposal: template {RailGauge} into {Track gauge}==
I initiated this move proposal in [[Template_talk:RailGauge#Requested_move_into_.27Template:Track_gauge.27|Template talk:RailGauge#Requested move]]. Please take a look and join if you are interested. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 00:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Transmission brake]] ==
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|link=|48px|]]

The article [[Transmission brake]] has been [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed for deletion]] because of the following concern:
:'''Unreferenced content indicating original research and/or copyvio from single contributor/editor. Failure to provide sourcing suggests possible abuse of autopatrolled privelege‎'''

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be [[WP:DEL#REASON|deleted for any of several reasons]].

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] or on [[Talk:Transmission brake|the article's talk page]].

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion process]], but other [[Wikipedia:deletion process|deletion process]]es exist. In particular, the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion]] process can result in deletion without discussion, and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] allows discussion to reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for deletion. [[Special:Contributions/81.103.181.43|81.103.181.43]] ([[User talk:81.103.181.43|talk]]) 22:17, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

==Category:Bugatti engines and subcategory==

'''[[:Category:Bugatti engines]]''', which you created, has been nominated for '''Deleting''' with '''Dual Upmerge''' to [[:Category:Bugatti]] and [[:Category:Volkswagen engines]]. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 2#Category:Bugatti engines and subcategory|the category's entry]]''' on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|Categories for discussion]] page. Thank you.[[User:RevelationDirect|RevelationDirect]] ([[User talk:RevelationDirect|talk]]) 15:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

== [[Polandball]] ==

Hi, I have recently expanded and rewritten the [[Polandball]] article at [[Draft:Polandball]]. I have also requested undeletion of the original article (that should never have been deleted in the first place) at [[Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2014_August_6]]. I am leaving you this message as you commented at [[Talk:Polandball]] not long ago. [[Special:Contributions/185.49.15.25|185.49.15.25]] ([[User talk:185.49.15.25|talk]]) 07:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

== Acrow props ==

In the last two years you have failed to provide any evidence that the Acrow prop is any different than the many different varieties of props. The reference on props that you quote doesn't even have the term anywhere in it. Unless you provide evidence along the lines outlined in the talk page, that is, a reference that clearly states that an Acrow prop is somehow materially different than a jack post and not simply a UK-ish name for the same thing, I will be merging the pages shortly. [[User:Maury Markowitz|Maury Markowitz]] ([[User talk:Maury Markowitz|talk]]) 13:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
==Category:Volkswagen diesel engines==

'''[[:Category:Volkswagen diesel engines]]''', which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 15#Category:Volkswagen diesel engines|the category's entry]]''' on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|Categories for discussion]] page. Thank you. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] [[User talk:Armbrust|The Homunculus]] 11:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

== Wikipedia sucks ==

Hi Andy, we know Wikipedia sucks. I just wanted to let you know I miss you, and I want you back quick. Specifically, I'd like to have your opinion on the term 'turbo-compounding' used in [[Formula One engines]]. To some, you are precious. [[User:Yiba|Yiba]] ([[User talk:Yiba|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Yiba|contribs]]) 04:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The rest of humanity hasn't matured enough for something so simple. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.62.189.7|207.62.189.7]] ([[User talk:207.62.189.7|talk]]) 01:58, 21 August 2014 (UTC) 

== [[:Startix]] ==

This might interest you and you are most welcome to adjust it as you wish. [[User:Eddaido|Eddaido]] ([[User talk:Eddaido|talk]]) 04:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

== Welcome! ==

Thought you quit. Nevertheless, welcome back to en.wiki. [[User:OccultZone|'''OccultZone''']] ([[User talk:OccultZone#Top|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/OccultZone|Contributions]] • [[Special:Log/OccultZone|Log]]) 10:29, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
: Oh, I quit, I just came back to leave a message. Thanks though. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

== Breath of fresh air ==

Thank you for the reality check about primary sources (apropos of [[Keswick, Cumbria]]). One feels under the cosh sometimes at FAC, and outbreaks of common sense as here are a great relief! '''[[User:Tim riley|Tim riley]][[User talk:Tim riley| talk]]''' 21:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
: You're welcome. I don't dispute your action in removing it, because the likelihood is that knee-jerk reactions by reviewers will take against it in just that manner.
: Yet when did "write a featured article" come to mean ''removing'' good sources? If we start making reactions like that, it's time to look at the fundamental goals and ''very'' hard at any secondary practices that have come to limit us in achieving them. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:06, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
::Quite so! Just such flak has had me adding links to local newspaper reports, many of which, you can bet, were entirely drawn from press releases issued by the scorned primary sources. But such is WP! '''[[User:Tim riley|Tim riley]][[User talk:Tim riley| talk]]''' 21:13, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

== High Down ==

Many thanks! [[User:LoopZilla|Gordo]] ([[User talk:LoopZilla|talk]]) 10:20, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
: You're welcome. That has been a missing piece for some time now. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:46, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

== Bell ==

Many thanks, I'll try and integrate the Belarusian connection into the article. [[User:Gareth E Kegg|Gareth E Kegg]] ([[User talk:Gareth E Kegg|talk]]) 15:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

== Coping Saw ==

Hello Andy
I hope I am putting this in the right place. I am new to editing Wikipedia and it is certainly not my intention to engage in any 'edit wars' :-)
The issue regarding which way coping saw blades face has raged for a generation - at least! My intention was to edit in such a way as to leave the question open. My belief however is that it all depends on how they are used, i.e. if pulled down on to a V board then, yes, backwards as with a fretsaw for the same reason, but if used more normally with work held in a vice then if cutting on the back stroke sawn waste would obscure the line being followed - and is unnecessarily uncomfortable to do.
My evidence is in every B&Q store – the manufacturers Eclipse package their fret saws with blades facing the handle but they package coping saws with them facing forwards. Note also that jigsaws have teeth pointing downwards so the line is not obscured by waste during cutting.
With regard to the often quoted matter of blade tension this really is not the issue. A coping saw frame is completely symetrical and the nature of the forces on the blade will be the same whether the frame pushed or pulled - ie if pulled then the vertical side of the fame next to handle will be leading and pulling but if pushed then the vertical side away from the handle will be leading and pulling - it is the spring of the frame that provides tension either way. I should end by saying that I have a background of some 50 years in technology education and my concern is that I am currently creating DT Online and wish to make links to the many excellent contributions in Wikipedia – you will understand my wish to avoid contradictions between the two sites.[[User:DTOnline|DTOnline]] ([[User talk:DTOnline|talk]]) 12:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

:[http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/chris-schwarz-blog/coping-saws-from-bricks-to-fretwork-frogs A coping saw blog] Could be a useful starting point when we get round to reffing and expanding the ==History== b(stalking)-- [[User:ClemRutter|Clem Rutter]] ([[User talk:ClemRutter|talk]]) 17:54, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

:What an excellent blog and thorough research. Could we cite this in the Coping Saw article? I find myself agreeing with all of it and quite regretting I had not come across it earlier in my technology education career - but then we would have had to find something else to discuss over a beer :-) [[User:DTOnline|DTOnline]] ([[User talk:DTOnline|talk]]) 09:55, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

== Teflon Tape (PTFE Tape) ==

OK, I did some research and I see that many websites do mention plumbers tape as equivalent to PTFE tape. Though I am no plumber I've been a homeowner for a long time and have come across plumbers tape as being a metallic strap. This is the more conventional and (before pop culture took over the Internet) the more accepted use of the term in the trade as far as I can tell. So it depends if the encyclopedia should reflect pop culture or the industry. This is sort of like defining fruits versus vegetables. ([[User talk:Dudshan|talk]]) 15 October 2014 15:45 UTC
: Even if steel tape (what's sold here as "builder's band") is termed plumber's tape, that still doesn't change that some markets refer to PTFE tape as plumber's tape too. Clarification is always good, but that shouldn't remove what is a recorded use and pretty widespread, even if not in some countries. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 09:30, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

== Eric ==

I see nothing to be gained from discussing Eric at any "noisy" forum such as the noticeboards or Jimbo's talk page, where he has an entourage. The question is whether the ArbCom should be asked to deal with him. [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 17:56, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
: One might say that there is little to be gained by discussing Eric anywhere. My confidence in Arbcom is however exceeded by the effort needed to file with them. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

== Notice ==
[[File:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#New editor making usual edits to political party categories. Sock?|New editor making usual edits to political party categories. Sock?]].  Thank you. - [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 14:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

==Steel helmet vs. Steel Helmet, etc.==
Hello - I wanted to touch base with you about [[Steel helmet]], my edit to which you have reverted. I am of two minds (at least) about the best way to handle this. The phrase "steel helmet" is one that would be easy to mistakenly link to the article for the wrong thing, as shown in the history of the article [[Thale]], where [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thale&diff=630254619&oldid=571540192 I recently made this correction]. Would it perhaps be better to make a disambiguation page that both [[Steel helmet]] and [[Steel Helmet]] (and their plurals) point to, which could then reference [[Brodie helmet]], [[Stahlhelm]], [[The Steel Helmet]], and perhaps other articles? In any event, I am going to put a <nowiki>{{for}}</nowiki> template at the top of the Brodie article pointing to the film's article. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks [[User:KConWiki|KConWiki]] ([[User talk:KConWiki|talk]]) 17:49, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
: It was fine as it was. "steel helmet" is a very common generic term for the subject we have at [[Brodie helmet]]. There's even an argument to be made for moving Brodie helmet to [[steel helmet]]. [[The Steel Helmet]] though is a minor film and just one very narrow and specific use of the term. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
==You made a mistake here==
You recent revert [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_notable_3D_printed_weapons_and_parts&diff=630514128&oldid=630512717 here] is incorrect. I explained reason for removal [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marty_in_UT&diff=630512854&oldid=629814861 here], the user added data from a soruce that discusses the item, but the source is the website which created the item. So therfore it is not a third party soruce. Secondly the person failed to prove it is notable. I have checked on google and cant find notable websites discussing this item. I have therfore reverted your edit for now. The user also created this article about the item: [[Draft:Raptor Grip M500]],which was declined on the same ground that it was not notable--[[User:Misconceptions2|Misconceptions2]] ([[User talk:Misconceptions2|talk]]) 14:00, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
==Irrelavnt link==
A link to the notable 3d pritned articles were added to those articless because they are relevant e.g [[landing gear]]--->there is 3d pritned landing gear in the article. [[Panavia Tornado]] ---> there is 3d pritned tornado parts in the article--[[User:Misconceptions2|Misconceptions2]] ([[User talk:Misconceptions2|talk]]) 14:48, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
::"It's a derringer, not a pepperbox" the reliable sources like wired and guns.com says its a pepperbox--[[User:Misconceptions2|Misconceptions2]] ([[User talk:Misconceptions2|talk]]) 15:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

== [[Special:Diff/630790883]] ==

Could you ''please'' elaborate on why you just reverted again here? [[WP:MOS]] does not mention sister project links, only [[WP:LAY]] does, FWIW.    [[User:FDMS4|FDMS]]  4    15:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

: As your own message stated, this is a box-type template, which is the template we use for per-article links to sister projects such as Commons.
: Why do you think the small inline version of this template is appropriate instead? That is used for ''inline'' links, or at least links within blocks of text. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 15:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
::Erm, you are wrong. [[WP:LAY]]: ''If box-type templates are not good, […] since they result in a long sequence of right-aligned boxes (images, in this case; note) hanging off the bottom of the article […], then consider using "inline" templates, such as {{Commons-inline}} in the "External links" section, so that links to sister projects appear as list items''. The {{tl|Commonscat}} template was not displayed next to the external links, so I replaced it with a very common template that does.    [[User:FDMS4|FDMS]]  4    00:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
::: That page is poorly worded and is unclear in one slightly obscure situation. However that situation is not relevant here.
::: Nor is there "a long sequence of right-aligned boxes" hanging off the end of the article: there is only one.
::: The purpose of the Commons link box is to give easy visual recognition to readers. It does this through recognisable consistency between its use on various pages. Are you saying that in some obscure cases we should abandon this useful benefit and switch to using a barely visible and certainly unrecognised inline version? Just because the number of images exceeds some arbitrary threshold? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:42, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
::::This is not an ''obscure case'' – there are 46524 transclusions and {{tl|Commonscat}} breaks page layouts in ''a lot more situations''. If you don't like the alternative (which other major Wikipedias use as the default btw), start a RFC on changing [[WP:LAY]] or a RFD on the template itself (or do you really think it is intended to be used inline in content sections?).    [[User:FDMS4|FDMS]]  4    01:43, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

== Python, Cython and Category:C_programming_language_family ==

If Dart, Go, and ECMAScript are appropriate for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:C_programming_language_family ,
Python (CPython) and Cython are appropriate for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:C_programming_language_family ;
as well as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Free_software_programmed_in_C .

--[[User:Wes.turner|Wes Turner]] ([[User talk:Wes.turner|talk]]) 11:49, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

: [[WP:OSE]] The fact that Perl, Java, Ruby and JavaScript/ECMAScript are also (for the moment!) incorrectly described as "C family languages" (because you've just added them) does not mean that Python should be too. Please see [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_October_24#Category_talk:C_programming_language_family]] [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:17, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

== Esteem ==

Dear Andy,

I have noticed that you have removed the edit I made on page for Furnaces. I have read further on your talk page and agree that maybe these links were not required and the data should rather be added to the page itself instead of creating an external link.
You have also marked the page on 'Esteem_(Company)' for speedy deletion. Can you please elaborate on this. The content on all other companies' in that work in our field is similar and does not provide any out of the ordinary information. It only provide information about the company and about its work.
I can take up time and add details of why Esteem is a good candidate for addition to wikipedia, but request for immediate deletion seems to be a bit harsh and discriminating.

I can see you are an experienced person on wikipedia and I have just started adding information. So your guidance will help me.

Please respond.

[[User:Monugeni|Monugeni]] ([[User talk:Monugeni|talk]]) 11:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
==[[HB 876 mine]]==
You are right, the image does not show unicorns. That is very observant of you. But neither does the text mention unicorns. Unicorns are not the issue. The text, however, ''does'' mention design elements affording retardation and self-erection . Unfortunately, anyone looking at the image might think either the description or the image wrong as these items are not shown in the picture. Therefore my edit actually provided a sensible explanation as to why others might have trouble interpreting the image. Thus my view is that your reversion of my edit is rather tendentious. I will not start an edit war, but would ask that you respond to this message here and, if you have not changed your mind, explain why you still think it appropriate to remove this potentially helpful information. [[User:Accassidy|ACCassidy]] ([[User talk:Accassidy|talk]]) 20:00, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
: The image is the image we have. We do not have a complete submunition to photograph (at least I don't). The text describes the overall configuration, the caption describes what is visible in the image. There is no confusion here. If you can think of a clearer caption then by all means add it. Adding a note to the main text implying "the image is wrong" by describing what it ''isn't'' is unhelpful. The image is of the casing. It does show the shaping of the steel casing so as to produce the distinctive fragmentation pattern. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

== [[Jacobs bogie]] ==

Andy, Please see my post at [[Talk:Jacobs bogie#Jacobs bogies and shared bogies for articulation]]. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 18:41, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
==Category:Defunct villages in Wales==

'''[[:Category:Defunct villages in Wales]]''', which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''[[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 November 4#Category:Defunct villages in Wales|the category's entry]]''' on the [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion|Categories for discussion]] page. Thank you. - [[User:Adam37|'''Adam37''']] [[User talk:Adam37|Talk]] 21:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

== ANI ==
[[File:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:75.83.189.188 edit-warring, possible NLT|User:75.83.189.188 edit-warring, possible NLT]].  Thank you. [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] ([[User talk:DMacks|talk]]) 04:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Europefan]] ==

Hi. Regarding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Europefan]], could you please point us to evidence that more explicitly suggests '''sockpuppetry'''? Comments like '''"Behaviour"''' or '''"Obvious edit warring over CSD"''' may point to disruptive editing, but they are not specifically '''sockpuppetry'''. The general standard at WP:SPI is that you need to present at least two "diffs" — one from the sockmaster, and one from the presumed sockpuppet — though more than this may sometimes be necessary in order to back up a suspicion that one person is using multiple accounts in an impermissible way. Other kinds of editing ''faux pas'' (not involving sockpuppetry) should not be reported at WP:SPI. Unless you can bolster your reports with clear evidence specifically pointing to sockpuppetry, this SPI is likely to be closed without any action being taken. — [[User:Richwales|Rich]][[User talk:Richwales|wales]] ''(no relation to Jimbo)'' 06:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

== [[Fusil automático Bogotá]] ==

Isn't a lack of notability the main reason for deleting an article? [[User:Rezin|Rezin]] ([[User talk:Rezin|talk]]) 23:17, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
: Yes it is. However we judge notability by what ''independent'' sources say, such as the newspaper sources already in the article. Rocking up at a sourced article and saying "It's just not notable" doesn't change this. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
::I don't know what "rocking up" means. :) In any case, there is one newspaper article that's reprinted in a second newspaper. This is about a homemade weapon of which there exists only one copy. Here is a translation of that article.[http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.elnuevosiglo.com.co/articulos/7-2013-entregan-lanzagranadas-en-desarme-en-usme.html&prev=search] It doesn't even seem to mention the firearm, though maybe the translation is faulty. Other than that, there's a single blog citation.
::My reading of [[WP:Notability]] is that there needs to be a greater depth of coverage of a topic for there to be an article. Am I misreading it? 23:32, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
:::It's probably worth adding that the article was posted by a blocked sock of an editor with a reputation for very poor work, including creating numerous articles on non-notable topics, made-up facts, and widespread copyright violations. I have been doing some work to clean up after the editor. [[User:Rezin|Rezin]] ([[User talk:Rezin|talk]]) 23:51, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Have you had a chance to review the sources, contribution history, etc., regarding this article? If you really think it's a worthwhile article please let me know. Otherwise I'll proceed through the deletion process. [[User:Rezin|Rezin]] ([[User talk:Rezin|talk]]) 17:08, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

: It's probably best as a section within a broader article on "Home made weapons and submarines of the Colombian cartels / FARC". Clearly it's not unique and the open bolt blowback SMG design is getting almost widespread [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/09/15/drug-cartel-diy-open-bolt-automatic-rifles/]. The .50 cal one is quite fearsome.
: However I wouldn't seek to delete this article, even in isolation. We meet [[WP:V]] to show that the thing existed and we recognise that home-built weapons in Colombia are real, not insignificant aberrations, and have sourcing to show that much. From that point, we should try to move forwards, not simply find excuses to delete whatever we can. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

: Also, this belongs on the article talk:, not here. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

::I've responded on the talk page about the content issue. But what does "rocking up" mean? You'll have to excuse my ignorance: I'm American and I'm not up to date with British idioms. [[User:Rezin|Rezin]] ([[User talk:Rezin|talk]]) 17:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
::: Just to show up unannounced or out of context. It's not pejorative, but it's in contrast to the other editors who have worked on this article over the past year. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:41, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
::::Ah, thanks. So you 'rocked up' to it too, I guess. ;)
::::For future reference, how do you think we should deal with articles written by editors who've created scores of sockpuppets and been blocked countless times, and who have specific histories of pasting copyrighted text from obscure sources, etc? Do we extend good faith to their contributions and assume it's worthwhile or do we scrutinize it more carefully? I ask because this particular user has created numerous articles many of which are of poor quality, many of which have been deleted. Should I continue to review them and try to fix them, or should I just leave the crappy stuff where I find it? I'm all in favor of retaining good content, but it seems like the average quality of Wikipedia articles can be improved by cutting out the junk. [[User:Rezin|Rezin]] ([[User talk:Rezin|talk]]) 17:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
::::: I think I found it from the 3D printing aspect (see [[List of notable 3D printed weapons and parts]]) and the home-made category.
::::: As to articles, then I'm in favour of going forwards. In most cases, this involves recovering what's there - if it ''can'' pass muster (much as if it doesn't fail [[WP:CSD#A7]]), then it should be pushed to do so. Only in the case of really repetitive outright trolls ({{u|Europefan}} is a rare example) would I switch to [[WP:DENY]]. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
::::::This editor's accounts are partly listed at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ctway/Archive]]. He is really repetitive. Whether he's an outright troll depends on the definition of 'troll'. He is a serial producer of low quality articles, including copyright violations and seemingly made-up information. [[User:Rezin|Rezin]] ([[User talk:Rezin|talk]]) 22:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
::::::: That's a lot of socking! [[WP:DENY]] would certainly be justified. I think there's an article on the overall situation in central and south America, maybe even a worldwide one. It would be a good article topic, but some work to write and if it's any good and explains why particular designs are favoured in some countries, then likely to be deleted as OR. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:00, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

== Steam turbine ==

I don't know how I missed the fact that the IP edits were vandalism. Thanks for fixing this. [[User:Kendall-K1|Kendall-K1]] ([[User talk:Kendall-K1|talk]]) 12:47, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
: You're welcome. I always check histories, just to catch stuff like this. It's the sort of tedious donkeywork that makes these Indian college student test edits so damned annoying. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:51, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Dingley:
Sorry for your concern regarding my recent entry for 3d Printing of electric motors and generators. I was only following the United Technologies example. However, after your comment, I understand the conflict. Instead, I would like to put the following into the section,
"MotorPrinter is being used to manufacture the only brushless wound-rotor [synchronous] doubly-fed electric machine system known as Synchro-Sym to provide a range of electric motor and generator systems without RE-PM and with cost performance as never before seen" of course with links to "motorprinter", wound rotor doubly fed [Wikipedia], etc.

Is this okay? I am new to at least responding to users, so your response will let me know that I am doing at least this correctly.

Best Regards,
Fred Klatt

== Reis telephone revert ==

Hi, why do you revert a true statement in the [[Reis telephone]] article? Reis was a German and his telephone thus was a german invention [[User:Schily|Schily]] ([[User talk:Schily|talk]]) 12:42, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

: Primarily because of [[WP:DENY]] of a banned disruptive troll. He's even banned on the ''German'' wikipedia. Please see [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Europefan/Archive]] and also [[Talk:List of German inventions and discoveries#More missing German inventions and discoveries in list]].
: Secondarily, because this claim is (as always) unsourced. No one had thought it necessary to add it beforehand (which is suspicious), it's unsourced when Europefan added it, and many, ''many'' of his nationalistic claims just don't stack up when examined closely. This is not some good-faith editor being hounded by British military homophobes (as I think his last lurid insult had it [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal_talk:LGBT&diff=prev&oldid=635316296]), it's an editor who's somewhere between "outright troll" and "too careless to trust anyway".
: If you wish to take this edit on yourself and you check sources that show this invention (i.e. a significant and innovative step) was produced by a German (i.e. someone who really is German, in Germany) then feel free to make it as ''your own'' edit, per [[WP:EVADE]]. Please join in the debate about nationalist invention categories though, because it's not a simple question and there's much against taking a simple approach to it. As to supporting the poor oppressed troll though, take a look at the big picture of his inaccurate history first. There is a reason why several people who've encountered him before now support a simple blanket [[WP:DENY]]. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
::Being banned on the German Wikipedia is not something that is significant, there are strange admins. But do you really believe that Reis was not a German? [[User:Schily|Schily]] ([[User talk:Schily|talk]]) 18:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
::: I don't ''know'' that Reis was a German, and that the particular invention is significant. The troll's past record is so bad that I'm not inclined to spend my time and effort discovering and confirming this, one way or the other. I certainly know that the osteotome is Scottish, not German, despite his protestations to the contrary. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
::::I don't care who is writing something, I however care whether this is correct or not. The claim "German invention" looks correct, so what is your problem? btw: I cannot see any occurrence of the term "osteotome" in the article. [[User:Schily|Schily]] ([[User talk:Schily|talk]]) 11:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
::::: "Looks correct" doesn't pass [[WP:V]] and this troll is untrustworthy. If, in such a case, you're just following the troll's edits blindly, then I would warn you of [[WP:MEATPUPPET]]. If you haven't found osteotome then you clearly haven't bothered to read the two links I suggested, so I see little point in trying to discuss this with you further. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:34, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
::::::Reis is a German name and he presented the invention in Germany to Physikalischer Verein Frankfurt and to the Preußische Telegraphen Inspektion, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philipp_Reis. So what is your problem here? BTW: even the links you provided do not mention the IP 47.64..xx.xx, so what is the problem? Looking into the link you provided, there is indeed something that is strange as one important invention for the quartz clock has been done by people from Telefunken in Berlin: the temperature compensating cuts that made the quartz clock usable for enhanced precision. [[User:Schily|Schily]] ([[User talk:Schily|talk]]) 17:47, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
::::::: WP is not a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]. Not even [[:de:WP]] [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:13, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
::::::::This is why there are citations on WP articles. Did you check the related citations in the article? You may also look at: http://www.gelnhausen.de/Philipp-Reis-Preis.469.0.html or http://www.deutsches-telefon-museum.de/Philipp-Reis.htm I guess that you are willing to accept a web page from a museum. [[User:Schily|Schily]] ([[User talk:Schily|talk]]) 11:30, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

== Importance ratings ==

Hi, please make sure that you use {{para|importance|mid}} and not {{para|importance|med}} as you did at [[Talk:British Rail Class 81]] - <code>med</code> isn't recognised so it's treated as {{para|importance|unknown}} --[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 19:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
: Thanks, I don't use these things much. Maybe the template should recognise both? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:19, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
::I could amend [[Template:WikiProject Trains]], but that would make it inconsistent with all the other WikiProject banners. Or I could amend [[Template:Importance mask]] which would put [//tools.wmflabs.org/templatecount/index.php?lang=en&name=Importance_mask&namespace=10 nearly 5 ''million'' pages] in the job queue. Best to leave it alone, I think. --[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 21:38, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

==Thanks==
Thanks for fixing [[Wikipedia:Overcategorization|Overcategorization]] with Category:Ship burials and Category:Viking ship burials. Have a nice weekend. [[User:Krakkos|Krakkos]] ([[User talk:Krakkos|talk]]) 20:42, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

: Thanks, I'm just a bit wary about the term "Viking". There are some Anglo-Saxon and early Russian burials here too (and of course, the Egyptians). Would it be better to go with some broader overall group? Not really my field. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

:: I support the way you're categorized it now, with a general Category:Ship burials and a Category:Viking ship burials as a subcategory. The Russian ship burials are however probably [[Varangians|Varangian]]/[[Rus' people|Rus']], so it's probably reasonable to add them tom Category:Viking ship burials. [[User:Krakkos|Krakkos]] ([[User talk:Krakkos|talk]]) 21:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

==Carpentry==

Andy, The list was of famous carpenters. Paulinho da Viola is listed there.Peter J. McGuire is a very famous carpenter in the U.S.[[User:Kmccook|Kmccook]] ([[User talk:Kmccook|talk]]) 17:12, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

: Thanks for the pointer – I've removed [[Paulinho da Viola]] as there's no indication he's a carpenter. As to [[Peter J. McGuire]], then he's a famous person who's a carpenter, but he's not famous for his carpentry. As a result, carpentry might have some relevance to his article, but his article isn't relevant to carpentry. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:17, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Andy, really..founding the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America isn't enough? Dana Dorsey built the African-American community in Miami so I guess carpentry was his means. I see this. But McGuire is a hero to every carpenter I know! Here he is at the CIC site. http://www.cic-ubc.org/aboutus-ubc.htm
I am going to put Peter back in after. After all, Jesus is there.I believe working carpenters are proud to claim PJM's influence on the trade.[[User:Kmccook|Kmccook]] ([[User talk:Kmccook|talk]]) 20:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
: No, it isn't enough - he's a union leader and noted for such, not a carpenter. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:30, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

==Range Rover Articles==

In regards to the Range Rover articles I merged, the TACR2 article is a stub, and I am personally quite surprised such an article actually exists. Since it is based on the Classic Range Rovers, I saw fit a merger. Yes, the merger was undiscussed, but seeing as it is tiny stub, a merger seems quite appropriate. It was performed in accordance with the "Be Bold" and Wiki:merging guidelines. Please recosider your reversion of my edits. Thank You. [[User:Stratocaster27|Stratocaster27'']][[User talk:Stratocaster27|t@lk]] 20:55, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
: If you want to merge it, I'm sure you know how to discuss it.
: The TACR is a well-known Rangie variant with a substantial history and adequate sourcing. Merging because something is ''currently'' a stub is no reason. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:59, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

::The TACR is simply the military name for a ambulance conversion, and apart from a paintjob, is nearly identical to any 'normal' after-factory ambulance conversion. This warrants an entire page? And TACR2 page text is almost verbatim copied from [http://www.lr-mad.co.uk/en/tacr-2-and-commando LR Mad UK]site, not "adequately sourced." [[User:Stratocaster27|Stratocaster27'']][[User talk:Stratocaster27|t@lk]] 21:16, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
::: TACRs aren't even an ambulance, they're a fire engine. Care to stop now before you make a bigger fool of yourself? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:48, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
::: Enough with the edit-warring already. We have a policy: BRD - not just start edit-warring like a petulant child [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:49, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

::::Pardon me, they are indeed fire engines. I apologize for the slip of the mind in naming them ambulances. However, this does not ignore the fact that '''"TACR" is just a name'''...I know this is the internet and personal qualification is unprovable, but trust me when I say that I have extensive knowledge of classic Range Rovers. Land Rover would build them, ship them to an independent coachbuilders, and then the finished vehicles could enter military service (and take on the name TACR) or become vehicles owned by local government. I am not making a fool of myself, merely trying to explain the lack of need for the existence of a TACR2 page in the first place. Also, ad hominem attacks do not get you anywhere. [[User:Stratocaster27|Stratocaster27'']][[User talk:Stratocaster27|t@lk]] 22:08, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
::::: This makes about as much sense as your claim that 6×6 Rangies are "common"! Have you ever even ''seen'' a classic-series Rangie? Especially a pre-'89? (You can't convert a pre-'89 as a 6×6 without replacing everything from the transfer case back.) There were only ever a ''handful'' of 6×6 Rangies - and (apart from the German ones with no Rangie parts in the powertrain at all) they're only drivable on sand.
::::: "Land Rover would build them," Err... No. (They aren't ambulances either). The TACR is not built on a Rangie chassis, it's built on the Carmichael Commando 6×4 chassis. Lots of Rangie parts, but they're built, chassis and all, by Carmichael. If you were advocating renaming this article to that as a name, then you might have a point (probably most surviving "TACRs" offered for sale are Commandos, but not TACRs) although [[WP:COMMONNAME]] would still be against it. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 23:49, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

== [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Responsive_web_design&oldid=636537644#History RWD] ==

A number of related terms such as "flexible (e.g. images or layouts)", "fluid" (e.g. grid layouts), "elastic", and "liquid" were being used to describe layouts. Ethan Marcotte coined, and strictly defined, the term responsive web design (RWD) = (flexible images, fluid grid) in a May 2010 article in A List Apart. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/122.132.211.166|122.132.211.166]] ([[User talk:122.132.211.166|talk]]) 09:27, 6 December 2014 (UTC) 

: Yes, I agree completely. RWD begins with, and is defined by, Marcotte's post. Before that there was 5 years - a decade if you were good - of fluid layouts.
: I removed your link because I saw the link contents as being too commercial. I would still stand by this: If we need a ref, it needs to be a better ref than that.
: As to the content you added, then I would agree with it. If it had been added alone I'd have left it. In fact I've just re-added it, but without the ref.
: I don't like this article. I see it as an important technique but one that WP is failing badly to explain. The article is inaccurate: Adams didn't invent fluid layouts in 2004, they were about 5 years older than that. Adams' contribution was to start using client-side JS to adapt image size, and things that couldn't be controlled under CSS2 alone, in addition to the previous fluid work. The article fails to clearly explain what RWD is and it fails to explain what either CSS2 fluid layout is, or how RWD goes beyond this. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:53, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

:: Adam's "fluid" is simply the idea of not using fixed-width tables but letting the width vary with viewport.

:: Your "Marcotte's techniques ... declarative styling ... direct control of the designer ... would be suitable" is wrong: layout is fluid and images are flexible, controlled by viewport size rather than the designer. The links in the Gillenwater list I provided cover techniques dating back to media queries ([http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-css3-mediaqueries-20090423/ late 2008/early 2009]) providing not only fluid/flexible (Marcotte's narrow definition) but also hybrid fluid/fixed layouts that support fixed-width ad banners. Gillenwater's 2008 Flexible book was pioneering, and her 2010 CSS3 book covers using media queries for RWD (before the term was coined). — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/122.132.211.166|122.132.211.166]] ([[User talk:122.132.211.166|talk]]) 12:26, 6 December 2014 (UTC) 
::: This belongs at [[Talk:Responsive web design]], not here. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:59, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Will copy it over. ([http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G146.html CSS2 "Liquid"]) — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/122.132.211.166|122.132.211.166]] ([[User talk:122.132.211.166|talk]]) 13:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC) 

== East Lyn Valley edit revert ==

Andy

I'm puzzled as to why you reverted my edit relating to the Brendon Hills at [[East Lyn Valley]]. Unless I'm missing some vital piece of information, the Brendon Hills are nowhere near the East Lyn Valley. The East Lyn flows down to the sea at Lynmouth having gathered waters from tributaries which rise on Exmoor to the south. In the eastern part of its catchment, these include (amongst others) the Oare Water, Weir Water and Chalk Water; the closest part of this catchment to the Brendon Hills is at about grid ref SS 846430 near Lucott Cross. On 25K OS mapping the name of the Brendon Hills is centred on grid ref ST 019348 some 19km distant.

English Heritage describe the Brendon Hills as lying to the east of Exmoor - see http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional/research/landscapes-and-areas/national-mapping-programme/brendon-hills-nmp/ There is a moderately deep gap between the mass of these hills and Exmoor which is exploited by the A396 at Wheddon Cross - I'd expect that all of the country to the west of this point cannot be considered to be part of the Brendon hills but of Exmoor. Wheddon cross is 9km ESE of Lucott Cross. I cannot see how the Brendon Hills can be described as forming a part of the East Lyn valley. They'll only be a distant feature in the view from the very edge of the east Lyn catchment.

thanks [[User:Geopersona|Geopersona]] ([[User talk:Geopersona|talk]]) 19:57, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

: I think this comes down to how far West the Brendon Hills extend. I'd thought of them as going West past Wheddon Cross and Dunkery Beacon. In which case it's fair enough to consider them as part of the East Lyn scenery. The ridge is crossed by the River Avill down into Dunster, but geologically it's still the same ridge. Mind you, I can't find the western OS map for Watersmeet at present, let alone the geological. If you're convinced that the Brendons are defined to stop at Wheedon Cross then go ahead and remove it - I've no good source one way or the other. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
::Indeed. If this range extended west of Wheddon then it would run into the higher ground of Dunkery Beacon which would then be the high point of the range which I don't think anyone has ever suggested - the article currently has it as Lype Hill which mwould confine the range to the east of Wheddon. The 'Brendon Common' in the East Lyn area is not related to the Brendon Hills but to the quite separate hamlet of Brendon at SS 769482. Also the Brendon Hills article has the range drained by the [[River Haddon]] - this only happens somewhat east of Wheddon. Geologically, the rocks responsible for the Brendon Hills run all the way to Devon's northwest coast as per the descriptions in my recent [[Exmoor Group]] page. What I don't have is any reference to actually say that the range stops at Wheedon Cross but nor is there anything that says that it continues and all other evidence seems to point to it not crossing that line. cheers [[User:Geopersona|Geopersona]] ([[User talk:Geopersona|talk]]) 21:19, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

== FYI ==

I've had dealings with John before. Just so you know who you're speaking to:

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Parrot_of_Doom/Archives/2010/June#Pink_Floyd]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Parrot_of_Doom/Archives/2010/August#By_no_means_unique_around_here]

And pay particular attention to this comment:

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Parrot_of_Doom/Archives/2011/September#Do_you_think_the_ship_canal_is_ready_for_FAC.3F]

"Pardon me for barging in, but I think that is a stupendous point PoD. To mention a topic is not to endorse it; we're a neutral resource and we don't take sides, just report what the sources say. When the BBC, respected aviation writers, or the US Government itself all discuss an aspect of a topic, it becomes notable. Indeed as I think HJM pointed out, to suppress (or appear to suppress) a particular POV may give more comfort to the supporters of the POV than to report on it dispassionately."

[[User:Parrot of Doom|Parrot]] [[User talk:Parrot of Doom|of Doom]] 10:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

==GWR 850 and 1901 edits==

Hi Andy. Just saw your edits on GWR saddle tanks surviving into nationalisation - very interesting - didn't know that any had survived. I was slightly thrown by No. 2048 though since that locomotive belonged to the 2021 class. I guess that Casserly is discussing all GWR saddle tanks. Do you think it worth clarifying? Maybe something like:

:"Only three GWR saddle tank locomotives survived into nationalisation. Of these two were from the 850/1901 class, Nos. 1925 and 2007, which were scrapped in 1951 and 1949. The other was GWR class 2021 No. 2048 which was rebuilt as a pannier tank locomotive shortly after nationalisation and scrapped in 1952."

Probably worth adding to the 2021 article as well. Cheers. [[User:Robevans123|Robevans123]] ([[User talk:Robevans123|talk]]) 19:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

: Yes, Casserly treats the whole bunch as a swamp of indistinguishable saddle tanks. Which is a shame, as that (hugely useful) book tends to ration photos by sections, so a diverse class doesn't get as much coverage as one might otherwise like.
: Clarify away, anything you can add. I hadn't really thought about the 2021s to be honest. I'm interested in the scrapping date as I hadn't seen that previously. Not long was it - maybe they already had spare boilers the right size and it was a "use it or lose it"? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:36, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

::Done. Must get hold of a copy of Casserly. Yes - odd that it wasn't till 1948 that 2048 was fitted with panniers. Think the rest of the class had all been fitted by 1936. Someone must have forgotten it... Cheers. [[User:Robevans123|Robevans123]] ([[User talk:Robevans123|talk]]) 19:49, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
::: Were any converted during the war? I rather doubt it. I expect it soldiered on as long as it could, then was ignored, then someone found a spare Belpaire boiler. Tanks are cheap and might not even have been new, if others were being scrapped. Even the boiler might have come from another scrapper, as it would have been much newer.
::: I've edited your note though - see edit summary. The 1361 saddles all survived into BR as well. Change the wording if you want. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 19:53, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

== You might be interested to know ==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Admin_Guerillero_participating_in_private_board_for_off-wiki_targeting_of_article_and_abusing_admin_abilities_to_win_content_dispute

Evidence of administrator misconduct on [[Vani Hari]].

I'll be back after my exam to discuss it further. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.7.135.136|129.7.135.136]] ([[User talk:129.7.135.136|talk]]) 16:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC) 

: Do you have a link to the FB post? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

It's at http://www.facebook.com/groups/foodbabearmy/permalink/96423452359019 but you won't be able to see it unless their group admins make you a member. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.7.134.42|129.7.134.42]] ([[User talk:129.7.134.42|talk]]) 17:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC) 

::: Thanks. Unfortunately I was banned from that group after two days. Not sure if it was my suggestion that vaccination was a better way to stop whooping cough than organic brand names, or else they recognised me from the WP article.
::: I do have concerns about the level of Hari's knowledge, but that's nothing compared to the outright chemtrail and anti-vaxxer lunacies demonstrated by her followers. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 17:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

The misconduct of guerillero and his fellow admins in the cover-up is all the proof I need that the coordination there to violate Wikipedia policy is real. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.7.134.42|129.7.134.42]] ([[User talk:129.7.134.42|talk]]) 18:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC) 

::::: Fortunately WP is quite resistant to such off-wiki attacks. The problem is much more about biased admins that are already here, ready to use things like locking articles or threatening blocks to strong-arm content disputes. There is very little that can be done about such (just see the [[Nick Griffin]] incident at [[WP:BLPN]] recently) as there is a shortage of decent admins with time to get involved. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

== [[Mount Kent Skirmish]] ==
I didn't want to do a disruptive editing[[Special:Contributions/79.21.182.32|79.21.182.32]] ([[User talk:79.21.182.32|talk]]) 20:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

: Yes you did. You've done it repeatedly before and been told ''repeatedly'' that this is not how it works. Just stop it. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:54, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

== [[British Rail HS4000]] ==

Mr Dingly if you would like to. Check the group for Kestrel you will find the information readily available, which is why a link to the group was also posted, the information on the locomotive you already have is inconsistent and requires amendments, I will continue to change the information and post the link to the Project page. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Byron polar|Byron polar]] ([[User talk:Byron polar|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Byron polar|contribs]]) 21:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC) 

: Please take a look at [[WP:RS]] and [[WP:V]].
: You're making a change that I find "implausible". Not impossible, but it raises an eyebrow. At the time ''Kestrel'' was built there was nowhere that it could run at that speed, as the signalling just wasn't set up for it. Now it's a powerful loco and it's an easy matter to make it run at such speeds, just change the traction motor gearing. Yet without a credible source, I'm not going to believe it. Facebook groups aren't such a source. I think I probably have a few RS sources myself, if I can be bothered to root through the bookshelves - is it in David Clough's book? Edit-warring though is only going to end with you getting blocked. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:29, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

== Discretionary sanctions notification - BLP ==

{{Ivm|2='''Please carefully read this information:'''

The Arbitration Committee has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes|here]].

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[WP:INVOLVED|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
}} [[User:Callanecc|Callanecc]] ([[User talk:Callanecc|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Callanecc|contribs]] • [[Special:Log/Callanecc|logs]]) 07:41, 13 December 2014 (UTC){{Z33}}

: Do you mean anything in particular, or are you just following John's attacks over [[Nick Griffin]] and calling me a "blackmailer"? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 07:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

== [[Hartley Colliery Disaster]] ==

Hi Andy. Last October you asked if I was happy for the above to be put forward for GA review and were kind enough to suggest it was of that standard. Have you done anything regarding this, of is it something you were expecting me to do? Since about 2/3 of the text is down to me I would be reluctant to put it forward myself. Regards, [[User:Martin of Sheffield|Martin of Sheffield]] ([[User talk:Martin of Sheffield|talk]]) 13:49, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

: I'll happily nominate it if you wish. Finding a reviewer is another question - it's not quick, but someone will take a look at it after a while.
: Personally I don't get involved with GA. When I've nominated engineering articles for it before the reviewers haven't been engineers and have suggested changes that really weren't appropriate.
: I would suggest that you look directly for someone who might review it – someone with experience of GA reviews and some interest in engineering history. If I can be helpful at all, or if you want someone to nominate it, then I'm happy to do so. I've no experience at reviewing though and I'm in no hurry to bump up against another of the cliques and cabals. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 18:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Editors Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for your great work here! [[User:E-e-bayer lover|e-e-bayer_lover]] ([[User talk:E-e-bayer lover|talk]]) 21:18, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
|}

== Particle board ==

I wasn't aware that [[WP:SOFIXIT]] meant "let something that's been terribly written and sitting in the article forever continue to stink up said article for eternity". It's had tons of time to get fixed and it ain't happening. Apparently you'd rather let the garbage pile up than do something about it yourself. '''Ten Pound Hammer''' • ([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|What did I screw up now?]]) 21:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
: Here's a novel idea: get off your arse, do something constructive for a change. You might even learn to like the novelty.
: There is little wrong with [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Particle_board&curid=1340719&diff=638409918&oldid=638398553 the terrible section] you complain of - just fix it, copyedit it and source it, like a better editor would. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 22:37, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
::Or if it's so important to you, how about ''you'' fix it, if you're going to be so emphatic about what "good" editors do? '''Ten Pound Hammer''' • ([[User talk:TenPoundHammer|What did I screw up now?]]) 22:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

==Premature editing??==
Andy, take a look at the M.O.A. of the editor who raised the issue at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Premature_editing Village pump]. [[User:Bzuk|FWiW Bzuk]] ([[User talk:Bzuk|talk]]) 02:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

==Recent edit to [[Joshua Bonehill]]==
[[Image:Information.svg|25px]]
While I understand your point in reverting the prior edit, reading the article, there are no citations to back up the racist/immigration adjective (although, I agree it could be inferred). Since this is a blp, possibly defamatory statements should be sourced. Or perhaps I simply missed it in reading the article.

Thank you! [[User:Onel5969|Onel5969]] ([[User talk:Onel5969|talk]]) 11:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

== Please look at... ==

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Electrolux_Ankarsrum_Assistent#Are_Quotes.2C_Parentheses_and.2For_Italics_allowed_to_be_embedded_in_an_article.27s_title.3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Electrolux_Ankarsrum_Assistent#Are_Quotes.2C_Parentheses_and.2For_Italics_allowed_to_be_embedded_in_an_article.27s_title.3F]


[[User:LP-mn|LP-mn]] ([[User talk:LP-mn|talk]]) 02:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

== [[Bush Ranger (4WD)]] ==

Hi Mr Dingley,
Firstly, let me explain that I am a total newby and just attempting to correct factual issues with the above page. I have noticed that, although the page has sat for a few years, it was not challenged. Now that I have attempted to edit it, it is drawing attention. One of my problems is that I am having trouble navigating around the site due to my lack of knowledge of the jargon, etc.

One of the banners states that the subject may not meet the requirements for notability. In Australian 4WD circles the Bush Ranger is well known through magazine articles and web pages, having being manufactured by John E Davis Motorworks since about 1997. It is a small volume kit car, but still relevant to the Australian motor industry on an historical basis.

The other banner asks for references. I have placed some references on the page.

Your suggestions as a moderator are greatly appreciated as I believe this page merits inclusion in the knowledge base. For you information, I am the current Heritage officer of the Gold Coast Land Rover Owners Club.
--[[User:DRMBR|DRMBR]] ([[User talk:DRMBR|talk]]) 02:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

: Hi, I'm not familiar with Australian off-roading. I've not encountered the Bush Ranger, but if you're sure it's significant, then let's go with it.
: What it needs here is ''independent'' coverage. Coverage by its own makers is great, but it needs independent stuff - probably from the off-roading magazines - to really show notability.
: It would also be good to explain just what it is. How much Rangie is left? What's the chassis? Is the roll cage welded in integrally, or a bolt-on? Are the suspension links still Rangie, or extended? What are the axles (and how do you stop the flimsy Rangie diffs breaking)? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

==''Merry Merry''==
To you and yours [[File:Weihnachtsschmuck.JPG|thumb|left]] [[User:Bzuk|FWiW Bzuk]] ([[User talk:Bzuk|talk]]) 14:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

== Don't know if you're still interested... ==

.. but you made some remarks in the section on [[Talk:City of Adelaide (1864)]] about the supposed "gender neutral" usage of "it" instead of "she" for ships. I have added some statistics to the relevant section of this talk page that show that Wikipedia usage in articles about tea clippers is overwhelmingly "she". From this I conclude that another Wikipedia article about a clipper (''City of Adelaide'') really ought to follow the same convention.

Since I am still trying to find my way through all the Wikipedia ways of doing things, is my opinion likely to make anything happen? Is there any point in trying to create a forum to consider this matter? If so, how do I do it?

Thanks [[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 00:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
:{{TPS}} It's a contentious issue on Wikipedia, but either may be used so long as the usage is consistent. See [[WP:S/HE]], although I'd recommend not changing the article from one to the other.--[[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) 18:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

==Spotted==
--[[User:Kitchen Knife|Kitchen Knife]] ([[User talk:Kitchen Knife|talk]]) 18:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

== Ariel Ace DYK ==

Not sure what the etiquette is for this, so I thought I'd ask if you wanted to be listed as a creator of [[Ariel Ace]] in the DYK nomination? — [[User:Brianhe|Brianhe]] ([[User talk:Brianhe|talk]]) 21:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
: I've had no significant involvement with that article and I want nothing to do with the rolling fiasco of DYK, so please don't put me anywhere near it. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 21:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

==Happy New Year!==
<div style="background:orange; padding: 10px; border-top: 3px solid yellow; border-left: 3px solid yellow; border-right: 3px solid yellow; border-bottom: 3px solid yellow 8px; font-size: 110%; font-family:Tahoma; text-align: center;">
[[File:Fuochi d'artificio.gif|left|150px]]
Dear {{BASEPAGENAME}}, '''HAPPY NEW YEAR''' Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions! From a fellow editor, [[User:Bzuk|FWiW Bzuk]] ([[User talk:Bzuk|talk]]) 21:25, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

This message promotes [[WP:LOVE|WikiLove]]. Originally created by [[User:Nahnah4|Nahnah4]] (see "invisible note"). 
</div>

== Modelling the Broad Guage==

I note you recently wrote an article about Narrow Gauge modelling scales.

Would you be willing to consider writing an article on 'Broad Guage' models, (I note your other article have included some GWR and SDR related content.)?

As I understood it there were some groups doing finescale 'broad-gauge' modelling in respect of Irish and Iberian protorypes?
[[User:ShakespeareFan00|ShakespeareFan00]] ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|talk]]) 14:09, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

: In follow-up to this, [http://www.broadgauge.org.uk/modelling/models_intro.html] has some stuff on modelling the GWR [[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 00:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
:: It's an interesting idea, but there's a shortage of decent sources visible. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:01, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

: That was my concern as well, at the very least (based on the link given) there's probably enough for a stub section in a relevant article. It seems from the article linked that most UK broad guage stuff is modelled to so-called 'finescale'.[[User:Sfan00 IMG|Sfan00 IMG]] ([[User talk:Sfan00 IMG|talk]]) 00:03, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

==Merge discussion for [[Timing belt (camshaft)]]==
[[File:Merge-arrows.svg|50px|frameless|left]] An article that you have been involved in editing, [[Timing belt (camshaft)]], has been '''proposed for a [[Wikipedia:Merging|merge]]''' with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going [[Talk:Overhead camshaft#Merger proposal: "Timing belt (camshaft)" into "Overhead camshaft"|here]], and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. [[User:SamBlob|Sincerely, SamBlob]] ([[User talk:SamBlob|talk]]) 13:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC) 

== [[Wabi-sabi]] ==

Although her volcanic glazes exhibit wabi-sabi characteristics, Lucie Rie is not the best example of the Japanese influence on studio pottery and Hans Coper owed more to Brancusi. Better examples would be Phil Rogers and Lisa Hammond. [[User:Pelarmian|Pelarmian]] ([[User talk:Pelarmian|talk]]) 13:10, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

==PUFFS==

How did it work out that we started editing this long-neglected article at the same time? I've saved my edits and will merge them with yours later. [[User:RobDuch|RobDuch]] ([[User talk:RobDuch|talk]]) 02:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
: I know little about it, just from Alden, and I didn't even know there was such an article until I saw you add the link to the Tangs. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 03:37, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

== City of Adelaide (1864) ==

You may be interested in the Style Proposal on [[Talk:City of Adelaide (1864)]] [[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 23:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

== Someone you upset...? ==

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/82.132.225.233 - reported/replied at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&oldid=641960369 [[User:Ronhjones|Ronhjones ]][[User talk:Ronhjones| (Talk)]] 03:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
: Oh, so the problem is that ''I'' upset ''them''? Also see IDriveAStickShift, who has just been using Telefonica to hide behind, then had a bunch of obvious socks rejected because "he can't have been in both Utah and Spain at the same time". [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 11:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

== User:Dhdhdhdffx ==

Hi, [[User:Dhdhdhdffx]] to me looks to be the same as [[User:Dbdbbdq]] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dbdbbdq] which leads to [[User:Morcohen2]] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Morcohen2/Archive all these socks]. You may be on this already, I couldn't tell from the SPI. [[User:Fountains of Bryn Mawr|Fountains of Bryn Mawr]] ([[User talk:Fountains of Bryn Mawr|talk]]) 03:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

: Definitely a prolific and persistent sock. I just added another registered name and five more IPs, a few of them old, to the SPI report. Drmies semi-protected [[IBM Personal Computer]] yesterday, allowing only autoconfirmed users allowed to edit or move. Should we make a list of the sock's current and recent targets? [[User:Jeh|Jeh]] ([[User talk:Jeh|talk]]) 07:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

: [[User:Dhdhdhdffx]] was just the first I saw, I don't know about any preceding sockmasters. Merge away.
: I saw this developing through [[Charles Proteus Steinmetz]] and the typical overblown nationalistic claims that "my local guy invented the wheel", rather than the PC stuff or socking specifically. The PC claims are quite spectacularly idiotic and badly written though, and as for ''" [[Josef Popper-Lynkeus|Popper]] also discovered the [[electricity]] that can run with wires."'', we're well off into [[WP:COMPETENCE]]. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:24, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

== Issac Koga ==

Hi Andy - thanks. I am not an expert on Koga's work (I am a space physicist) and I spotted that he had been left out only because I am a recipient of the URSI medal that carries his name. The then president of URSI (A Canadian man called Jull) told me a lot about Koga but I have lost touch with him. Looking at the literature there seems to have been some discussion about if the Koga cut was optimum - but it seemed to me that not have him mentioned in the story at all had to be wrong. If you know more of the details then please do add them. Thanks Mike — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:MichaelLockwood|MichaelLockwood]] ([[User talk:MichaelLockwood|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelLockwood|contribs]]) 12:34, 14 January 2015 (UTC) 
: The Koga cut wasn't optimum - but he discovered it in the 1930s, and at that time it was the first practical way to make a crystal that was temperature stable enough to not need a temperature controlled oven (in laboratory timing uses), or to allow VHF radio with closely spaced channels. Such systems as WWII airborne radio, at least in single-seater aircraft, couldn't have worked without. I think "Koga cut" was a term used in the 1930s (at least in England), but like so many terms (Yagi antenna) it disappeared after Pearl Harbour.
: Then in the 1960s he led the work (in the US) that found out much of his original theoretical work was significantly wrong. He published anyway. Can you imagine the embarrassment for a Japanese "national treasure" professor to admit such a thing, and to do so in a foreign (and recently an occupying) country? Can you imagine it happening today? Great guy. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 12:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

== your revision ==

heya. I was under the impression that acronyms should not begin sentences or titles. "HESH" being an acronym (else it would be "hesh", no?) I expanded it when it was beginning sentences. [[User:Primergrey|Primergrey]] ([[User talk:Primergrey|talk]]) 13:02, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
: It's a grey area, but HEAT & HESH are hugely common terms, in comparison to their full forms. The long forms are just barely used.
: WP suffers from this a lot. When the simplistic blanket application of a minor formatting style turns up at a specialist article, with a widely used specialist vocabulary, then proceeds to trample all over an established and stable article, then something is wrong. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
:: I see now that this is not mentioned in the MOS. (I wonder now if that's a standard anywhere or if it came to me in a feverish dream) But it raises a question of sorts; if things like HEAT and HESH are to be taken as words unto themselves and not a series of letters (like FBI) then their being in all caps does go against our MOS. FYI (that's another one), I've got no preference ''per se'' on any style issues. I just want to see a similar style on every page here. Same as in my paper encyclopedia here at home. If S-Sm and Sm-Sz differed in their handling of dashes, quote-slant directions, or serial commas, it would only be because I had mixed up two different sets. Piece out. [[User:Primergrey|Primergrey]] ([[User talk:Primergrey|talk]]) 13:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
::: If WP insists that FBI now needs to become fbi or Fbi, then it's the MOS that's wrong. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:22, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, no, that's not what I meant. The MOS advocates FBI, FYI, and MMA, but also advocates "laser" and "scuba" because they are read as words and not individual letters. Anyhow, do you really see my edits as "trampling all over" the article? I'm not trying to be a dick, I just stay so far away from changing ''content'' in articles that I didn't think I was capable of trampling, roughshod running, etc. Maybe I'm just dizzy from trying to wrap my head around "widely used specialist vocabulary". [[User:Primergrey|Primergrey]] ([[User talk:Primergrey|talk]]) 13:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
: The dichotomy arises because WP has a broad scope. This means that it covers topics, such as HEAT, that have a very narrow application in the real world. Yet within that portion of the world where ''any'' reference to such things is made, HEAT is universal (and not heat either - even though laser, scuba, sonar, radar have achieved this). So "specialist" and "widely used" don't contradict, they merely recognise that there is a broad world (which WP inhabits) and narrow worlds (which WP writes about).
: What's a mistake is to take WP's basic rules, a sensible set of defaults, and to think they are never to be over-ruled by well-established and documented practice within specialist fields. Just look at the mess over fuse / fuze. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 13:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey again. You seem to be all business and I respect that, so I apologize for the "specialist-widely used" rib. You are probably used to tacit assertions being couched in seemingly innocent questions, but I can assure you I was not playing at that. I'm just a copyediting enthusiast who shattered his elbow and now has too much time on his hands, apparently, to remember that "heat" is a word that exists outside of its munitional(?) context, unlike "laser" and "scuba". Military pages are often an absolute ''minefield'' (haha) of inconsistent capitalization, which is mostly what I am trying to help standardize. Again, with no dog in the fight of what "should" be the standard. [[User:Primergrey|Primergrey]] ([[User talk:Primergrey|talk]]) 13:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

== MLPainless and Vani Hari ==

I get the subtle feeling that someone who talks about being "up against a little team here"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMLPainless&action=historysubmit&diff=641141556&oldid=641090215] might possibly not be here to make good-faith edits. Call me crazy.

== "DavidPatrck70" ==

You've stumbled over one of the common tricks of the abusive admin clique. Every few months one of them needs a new scapegoat in order to harass ip editors that don't agree with one of their friend's pov, so they pick out some poor soul and falsify some charges and then declare that anyone who agrees with them is a "sock puppet."

DavidPatrick70 never even edited about Vani Hari, but that doesn't stop the corrupt liars from faking things and making up bullshit all day long. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.87.121.109|66.87.121.109]] ([[User talk:66.87.121.109|talk]]) 19:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC) 

Also, MLPainless is a pretty obvious admin's sockpuppet, it edits every 3-5 days and it's first edit was an entire wikified paragraph followed by a 6 mpnth gap and then sporadic gaps after along with battleground mentality, regular edit warring, and talks about how things "used to be" despite being a barely 2 year old obvious sockpuppet. Most likely it's part of Guerillero's sockfarm. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.87.121.109|66.87.121.109]] ([[User talk:66.87.121.109|talk]]) 19:48, 14 January 2015 (UTC) 

== Telescopic bridge ==

Re [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Telescopic_Bridge,_Bridgwater&diff=643433643&oldid=643430162]: [[MOS:APPENDIX]] says "box-type templates such as {{tl|Commons}} shown at right '''have to be put at the beginning of the last section of the article'''" (emphasis mine), or use inline link if it looks poor (and it does to me). If you agree, would you self-revert? [[User:Brianhe|Brianhe]] ([[User talk:Brianhe|talk]]) 22:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
: The box templates for sister projects aren't really in any section, as they're CSS floated (and so are outside the body text of the sections). What's important is that they are placed in the last section (whichever that is), not an earlier section, as otherwise they'd conflict with the headings.
: The MOS also points out that a new section and heading should not be created solely to hold them. They're ''usually'' in the External links section (as this is the last section, if all are present) but it's the fact that it's the ''last'' section, not that ELs are particularly relevant to them. In this article, the last section (as is also common) is References, which is where the template now is.
: The MOS also points out that the <code>-inline</code> form of the template is a condensed template for use in lists, not the default form when used in isolation (as here).
: As to placement within the section, then it's by default to the top (which works with the float). However we also often encounter articles (like this) where the text is short and the stack of boxes on the right is long. In which case placing it at the end of the text, with <code>|position=left</code> works better. In a margina lcase like this, there's no need to go that far though. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 00:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
::It looks like you moved the box. Thanks. — [[User:Brianhe|Brianhe]] ([[User talk:Brianhe|talk]]) 02:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

== One of your previous edits to "[[Pistol]]" ==

It seems that you were one of the last competent people to make an edit to the "pistol" page, since December another user has been making changes, and having it locked to prevent people from making it correct instead of a page based not in fact, but only on his views. I do not know if you ar an "autoconfirmed" user or not, but if you are and can revert the changes back to when it had all the relevant information, it would be awesome. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/180.87.192.43|180.87.192.43]] ([[User talk:180.87.192.43|talk]]) 23:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC) 

* It's a poor article with little useful content and a serious problem with [[WP:UNDUE]].
: That said, Luke's deletion of "revolver" is ridiculous. As is his assertion that ''"we have two articles; one on pistols, one on revolvers"''. Not only does this ignore the older forms from single-shot muzzle-loading flintlocks to turn-off barrel percussion pistols, it very obviously ignores [[semi-automatic pistol]]: the contemporary counterpart to revolver. We cannot use presence of a distinct subset article as proof that it's a disjoint topic. That would be a logical fallacy, to treat WP as [[WP:RS]] (oh such a convenient gift to the wikilawyer), but most of all because we already have separate articles for each and every subset of pistols, a fact he's conveniently ignoring. There is nothing exceptional about revolver in this.
: The solution to all this is obvious. The lead should be tiny, little more than the first sentence, and the pistol / handgun / revolver / automatic distinction given its own section. WP's NPOV on this is clearly to state that there are two interpretations current and to source both. It should then scope this (inherently vague) article as covering ''all''. Whatever we agree the correct definition to be (which obviously we can't) there is no reason at all to start removing revolvers from this (a question of our chosen scope, not implying that we're siding with one definition).
: I've had negligible involvement with this article, some past involvement with Luke. I have no desperate wish to increase either. His ''vociferous'' defence of an indefensible position is characteristically expected, but it doesn't augur well for achieving a sensible resolution that benefits the encyclopedia. I would suggest talking to MaterialScientist. I expect that he's actioned the protection from a purely administrative role, rather than any interest in the content, but they are at least a good and neutral admin. Feel free to quote my comments here. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 01:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

== Caisson ==

Hi Andy. I reverted your change to [[Caisson]] back to the one I made, which was made to remove the red link you had previously added. If you look at [[Caisson (lock gate)]] you will see that it was speedy deleted under [[WP:A10|A10]] for being a duplicate of [[Caisson lock]]. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to let me know! [[User:RegistryKey|'''RegistryKey''']][[User_talk:RegistryKey|'''(RegEdit)''']] 12:21, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

==Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion==
[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]] regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]]. The thread is [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Andy_Dingley reported by User:RegistryKey (Result: )]].  Thank you. [[User:RegistryKey|'''RegistryKey''']][[User_talk:RegistryKey|'''(RegEdit)''']] 12:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]] regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]].  Thank you. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/82.132.233.233|82.132.233.233]] ([[User talk:82.132.233.233|talk]]) 18:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC) 

:I've blocked the IP for disruption: the IP's AN3 report was in bad faith, and the address has a long history of problematic edits. '''[[User:Acroterion|Acroterion]] [[User talk:Acroterion|(talk)]]''' 18:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

:: Thanks, this is the stuff that makes it all so worth while. 8-( [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 20:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

::: I was about to comment on that 3RR report in support of AD but Acro got to it first. Maybe each of those articles needs a "not to be confused with (the other one)"? [[User:Jeh|Jeh]] ([[User talk:Jeh|talk]]) 04:27, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

== [[Talk:Caisson|Caisson talk page]] ==

Andy, please see the above talk page. As I previously mentioned, [[Caisson (lock gate)]] is already discussed in detail on the page called [[Caisson lock]], which is why Caisson (lock gate) was speedy deleted to begin with. [[User:RegistryKey|'''RegistryKey''']][[User_talk:RegistryKey|'''(RegEdit)''']] 13:04, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
: Why are you so keen to delete this entirely valid article? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 14:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

== British nationalist ==

hy nice to see, that you are always a BRITISH NATIONALIST guy. [[Special:Contributions/92.76.120.11|92.76.120.11]] ([[User talk:92.76.120.11|talk]]) 20:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

== January 2015 ==

Watch out for [[WP:3RR]] on [[Spark gap]]. Please read my earlier edit comment and [[Talk:Spark gap]]. [[User:Glrx|Glrx]] ([[User talk:Glrx|talk]]) 02:17, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
: "Watch out"? When ''you've'' already changed the spelling three times? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:51, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

== RfC: AfC Helper Script access ==

An RfC has been opened at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script|RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script]]. You are invited to comment. --[[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 16:56, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

== Waterstone ==

About the waterstone pic there... I am not sure why you undid my change. The pic does show a waterstone with a wooden casing, instead of two waterstones.
[[User:Yogomove|Yogomove]] ([[User talk:Yogomove|talk]]) 04:44, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

: This belongs at [[Talk:Sharpening stone#Waterstone image caption]] [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley#top|talk]]) 10:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

== South Wales Railway ==

Re: Your comment on my talk page. No problem. But, is "Richard Marshall" a reliable source? Without an actual dated copy of any documents from the original prospectus, all information in the article sourced from a single person's article should be removed entirely as unreliable. --[[Special:Contributions/24.47.169.50|24.47.169.50]] ([[User talk:24.47.169.50|talk]]) 23:14, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

User:The Almightey Drill

2015-02-04T01:49:07Z

89.76.8.142: additional information

{{Babel|en|fr-4|es-4|pt-2|it-2}}
{{Userboxtop |Userboxes}}
{{User Good Articles|3}}
{{User DYK|7}}
{{User contrib|25,000}}
{{User WikiProject Football}}
{{User WikiProject Football/England task force}}
{{User Spain football}}
{{User Italian football}}
{{Userboxbottom}}

[[File:Boormachine.jpg|thumb|left|Ready to drill through your grammatical errors - and then never look at the article or think of its subject ever again]]
Hello :)

I am The Almightey Drill and I like to delete random articles from wikipedia, because this gives me a feeling of being important. I am a student of modern Romance languages, with an obsessive and nearly all-consuming interest in football.

I mainly edit in small doses, such as correcting grammar, spelling, links and images. I have worked on the ''[[Flappy Bird]]'' article since it was at stub level, and nominated it for its {{classicon|GA}}Good Article status and contributed to its {{classicon|DYK}}DYK. I also successfuly nominated [[Milan Baroš]] for a {{classicon|DYK}}DYK, and created [[Operation Trojan Horse]] and [[2014 Coppa Italia Final]] and got them passed for {{classicon|DYK}}DYK too.

When I found the [[Czechoslovakia national football team]] article, it had no prose in it, despite the interesting and long history of the team. I extended it and had it passed for {{classicon|DYK}}DYK as well.

My 4th {{classicon|DYK}}DYK went to [[Paco Campos]].

==Football==
My club first and foremost is [[Chelsea F.C.]] Abroad, I have a long-standing affection for [[Inter Milan]] and [[Sevilla FC]], as well as recent love for [[Atlético Madrid]] and [[S.S.C. Napoli]].

I have made over 150 edits to the article on [[Diego Costa]], which is now a {{classicon|GA}}Good Article and {{classicon|DYK}}DYK. I also made the [[2014 FA Community Shield]] into a {{classicon|GA}}Good Article and {{classicon|DYK}}DYK.

I reviewed the Good Article Nominations for [[Ricardo Rodríguez (footballer)]], [[Toronto FC]], the [[2008 UEFA Champions League Final]] and the [[2014 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final]].

Articles I would like to raise to GA one day include [[Martin Ødegaard]], [[Koke (footballer, born 1992)]], [[Stefan de Vrij]], [[Marquinhos (footballer, born 1994)]], [[Filipe Luís]], and [[Saido Berahino]].

==My DYKs==
[[User:The Almightey Drill/DYK|Follow the link]].

==My templates==
{{The Chase}}
{{EA Guingamp}}
{{Rio Ave F.C.}}

==My awards==
==Thank you==
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|[[File:Modest Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]| [[Image:Modest Barnstar.png|100px]]}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Modest Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thanks for your [[Special:ActiveUsers|recent contributions]]! [[Special:Contributions/208.54.4.231|208.54.4.231]] ([[User talk:208.54.4.231|talk]]) 06:25, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
|}
== Precious ==

<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 60em; {{box-shadow|0.1em|0.1em|0.5em|rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 )}} {{border-radius|1em}} border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix">
<div>
<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; {{box-shadow|0.1em|0.1em|0.5em|rgba(0,0,0,0.75)}} {{border-radius|0.5em}}">[[File:Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg|85px]]</div>
'''long-standing affection for football''' 
Thank you, AL, user of Romance languages and with "long-standing affection", for quality articles such as [[2014 FA Community Shield]], for copy-drilling, for helping the {{diff|Flappy Bird|594043417||Flappy Bird}} fly, - you are an [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/PumpkinSky Prize|awesome Wikipedian]]!

--[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 09:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>

Countryballs

2015-02-04T01:47:26Z

89.76.8.142: /* Other countries */ reversal of vandalism

{{pp-sock|expiry=23 November 2014|small=yes}}
[[File:Polandball.PNG|thumb|200px|User-generated representation of Polandball.]]
'''Polandball''', also known as '''countryball''', is a [[user-generated]] [[Internet meme]] which originated on the /int/ board of German imageboard [[Krautchan.net]] in the latter half of 2009. The meme is manifested in a large number of [[online comics]], where [[country|countries]] are presented as spherical [[persona]]s that interact in often [[broken English]], poking fun at national [[stereotypes]] and [[international relations]], as well as historical conflicts. The comics style may be referred to both as Polandball (by convention, even in cases where there is no Poland among the cartoon characters) and ''countryball'' (or, collectively, ''countryballs'').

== Background ==
Polandball has its roots in an August 2009 "cyberwar" between Polish Internet users and the rest of the world on drawball.com. The website, which offers a virtual canvas, allows Internet users to draw whatever they want, and to draw over others' drawings. On the [[Internet in Poland|Polish Internet]], an idea was raised to draw the [[Flag of Poland|Polish flag]] on the ball, and thousands of Poles together managed to take over the drawball with a painting of white on top of red, with the word "[[Poland|POLSKA]]" written in the middle. After co-ordination from [[4chan]], this was then covered over by a giant [[Nazi swastika|swastika]].<ref name="gazeta">{{cite news|url=http://wyborcza.pl/1,86116,7462232,Wyniosle_lol_zaborcow__czyli_Polandball.html|title=Wyniosłe lol zaborców, czyli Polandball|last=Orliński|first=Wojciech|authorlink=Wojciech Orliński|date=5 August 2014|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20120101071958/http://wyborcza.pl/1,86116,7462232,Wyniosle_lol_zaborcow__czyli_Polandball.html|archivedate=1 January 2012|publisher=[[Gazeta Wyborcza]]|language=Polish|accessdate=6 August 2014}}</ref><ref name="cooltura">{{cite news|url=http://www.elondyn.co.uk/newsy,wpis,7731|title=Znowu lecą z nami w... kulki|last=Zapałowski|first=Radosław|date=15 February 2010|publisher=[[Cooltura]]|language=Polish|accessdate=6 August 2014|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6Rat4O7DW|archivedate=5 August 2014}}</ref>

[[Krautchan.net]] is a German-language [[imageboard]] whose /int/ board is frequented by English-speaking [[netizen]]s. The beginning of the Polandball meme is credited to ''Falco'', a British user on /int/, who in September 2009 created the meme using [[MS Paint]] in an apolitical way to [[troll (internet)|troll]] ''Wojak'', a Pole on the same board who contributes in [[broken English]], after which Polandball cartoons were enthusiastically drawn by [[Russians]].<ref name="gazeta" /><ref name="przeglad">{{cite news|url=http://www.przeglad-tygodnik.pl/pl/artykul/fenomem|title=Fenomem — Polska nie umieć kosmos|last=Kapiszewski|first=Kuba|date=5 April 2010|publisher=[[Przegląd]]|language=Polish|accessdate=5 August 2014|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6Rasv9f4k|archivedate=5 August 2014}}</ref><ref name=kurzgeek />

Polandball comics have no defined authors, and anyone is able to make one.<ref name=vox /> This has culminated in the meme propagating across various sites on the Internet, including [[Reddit]].<ref name=kurzgeek /><ref name=businesspost>{{cite news|last1=Ryan|first1=Emmet|title=Polandball is Reddit's answer to Crimea crisis|url=http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/Polandball+is+Reddit's+answer+to+Crimea+crisis/id/87198161-2385-315c-abda-d92435575507|accessdate=8 November 2014|work=[[The Sunday Business Post]]|date=4 March 2014}}</ref>

== Themes ==

=== Poland ===
[[File:Poland can into the European Space Agency.png|thumb|upright|An example of a Polandball comic which is an extension of the "Poland cannot into space" catchprase. The comic references Poland joining the [[European Space Agency]] in 2012.]]
The premise of Polandball, which gained in popularity in the wake of the [[2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash|crash in Smolensk]] which killed [[President of Poland|Polish President]] [[Lech Kaczyński]], is it represents Poland and its [[history of Poland|history]], [[Foreign relations of Poland|relations with other countries]] and [[stereotype]]s,<ref name="przeglad" /><ref name="hiro">{{cite news|url=http://hiro.pl/magazyn/magazyn_zjawiska/memy.html|title=MEMY. Legendy Internetu|last=Cegielski|first=Tomek|date=12 April 2011|publisher=Hiro.pl|language=Polish|accessdate=5 August 2014|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20110415014502/http://hiro.pl/magazyn/magazyn_zjawiska/memy.html|archivedate=5 August 2014}}</ref> focusing on Polish [[megalomania]] and [[Complex (psychology)|national complexes]].<ref name="cooltura" /><ref>{{cite news|last1=Kralka|first1=Jakub|title=Polski internet to potęga, po co te kompleksy?|url=http://www.spidersweb.pl/2012/05/polski-internet-to-potega-po-co-te-kompleksy.html|accessdate=5 August 2014|publisher=Spider's Web|date=11 May 2012|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6RbymTi82|archivedate=5 August 2014|language=Polish}}</ref> With the exception of English-speaking ones, interactions between countryballs tend to be written in broken English and [[Internet slang]], reminiscent of the [[lolcat]] meme, and by the end of the cartoon Poland, which is purposely represented as red on top of white (the reverse of the Polish flag), is typically seen weeping.<ref name="gazeta" /><ref name="cooltura" />

Some Polandball comics arise from the premise that Russia can fly into space, whilst Poland can not. One of the most popular Polandball cartoons begins with the premise that Earth is going to be struck by a giant meteor, leading to all countries with [[space technology]] leaving Earth and going into [[orbit]] around the planet. At the end of the cartoon, Poland, still on earth, is crying, and in broken English pronounces the canonical Polandball catchphrase "Poland cannot into space".<ref name="przeglad" /><ref name=infokam /> In this [[Polish joke|humorous way]], Russians put a halt to all discussion with Poles on which country is superior.<ref name="gazeta" /><ref name="przeglad" /><ref name="hiro" /> In another Polandball comic which delves into historic-political [[satire]], Poland is seen to be boring other countryballs, with its proclamation of "So when we crushed Russia and the turks [sic] were were the biggest country in the world... and...", leading other countryballs to laugh at it. Poland, by now irritated, utters [[:wikt:kurwa|''kurwa'']], and holds up a sign saying "Internet serious business", which is an internet slogan used to deride others who treat subjects with disdain, and in Polandball convention, finishes by crying.<ref name="gazeta" /><ref name="cooltura" /><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.webcitation.org/66ROeMOIC|title=Polandball cartoon|date=|publisher=Unknown|accessdate=26 March 2012}}</ref>

=== Other countries ===
[[File:Sweden-Finland.png|thumb|left|upright|A Polandball comic which satirises [[Sweden–Finland]].]]
Polandball can also include comics on other countries, but by convention these comics are usually still referred to as Polandball,<ref name="gazeta" /> although they can also be called countryballs.<ref name=kurzgeek /> Countries are also represented as balls,<ref name=vox /> although [[Singapore]] takes the form of a triangle and is called ''Tringapore''; the theoretical [[Fourth Reich]] is a tall rectangle with small eyes and is known as ''Reichtangle''; [[Israel]] takes the form of a [[hypercube]] called ''Israelcube'' (in reference to [[Jewish physics]]); and [[Kazakhstan]] takes the form of a brick called ''Kazakhbrick''.<ref name=kurzgeek>{{cite book|last1=Plomlompom|first1=Nils Dagsson Moskopp Erlehmann & Christian Heller|title=Internet-Meme : kurz & geek|date=2013|publisher=[[O'Reilly Media|O'Reilly Verlag]]|isbn=978-3-86899-806-1|pages=86–88|edition=1|url=http://books.google.com.au/books?id=bRywAgAAQBAJ|accessdate=5 August 2014|language=German|chapter=MS-Paint-Comics}}</ref> In addition, [[United States of America|America]] sports a pair of shades and the [[United Kingdom]] wears a monocle and a top hat.

[[Billiard ball|Cue balls]] of 1 through 8 are used to represent indigenous ethnic groups without a certain nationality. For example, the 1 ball (yellow) represents East Asians, the 7 ball (maroon) represents [[Native Americans]] and the 8 ball (black) represents Africans or black people in general. Extraterrestrials are represented by the 6 ball (green).

The simplicity of Polandball, added with its recognition of world history and a focus on current affairs, makes the meme suited to commenting on international events.<ref name=vox>{{cite news|last1=Fisher|first1=Max|title=Is there a series of irreverent political cartoons summing up the crisis?|url=http://www.vox.com/cards/ukraine-everything-you-need-to-know/is-there-a-series-of-pithy-political-cartoons-summing-up-the-crisis|accessdate=6 August 2014|publisher=[[Vox Media]]|date=25 July 2014|archiveurl=http://www.peeep.us/bd843cb0|archivedate=6 August 2014}}</ref> Amongst events which have been covered by Polandball and have been noted in the media, are the [[Senkaku Islands dispute]],<ref>{{cite news|title=Japon, Chine, vers une nouvelle guerre froide|url=http://www.franceculture.fr/emission-affaires-etrangeres-japon-chine-vers-une-nouvelle-guerre-froide-2013-03-09|accessdate=8 November 2014|work=[[France Culture]]|date=9 March 2013|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6Tve15wmz|archivedate=8 November 2014|language=French}}</ref> the [[Papal conclave, 2013|2013 papal conclave]] which saw Jorge Mario Bergoglio being elected as the [[Pope Francis|new Pope]],<ref>{{cite news|title=Wybór Franciszka okiem internautów|url=http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/swiat/wybor-franciszka-okiem-internautow/e1j5e|accessdate=6 August 2014|publisher=[[Onet.pl]]|date=14 March 2013|archiveurl=http://www.peeep.us/037878fc|archivedate=6 August 2014|language=Polish}}</ref> the [[2014 Ukrainian crisis]],<ref name=vox /><ref>{{cite news|script-title=ru:Аниматор из Камышина нарисовал мультфильм о «заболевшей» Украине|url=http://www.vlg.aif.ru/society/details/1311029|accessdate=8 November 2014|work=[[Argumenty i Fakty]]|date=6 August 2014|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6TvdP3cDW|archivedate=8 November 2014|location=[[Volgograd]]|language=Russian}}</ref><ref name=infokam>{{cite news|script-title=ru:Камышин «может в кантриболз»|url=http://infokam.su/n16994.html|accessdate=8 November 2014|work=Infokam|date=7 August 2014|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6TvdlsKwi|archivedate=8 November 2014|language=Russian}}</ref> the [[2014 Crimean crisis]]<ref name=businesspost /> and issues relating to [[Filipinos in Taiwan|Filipino workers in Taiwan]].<ref>{{cite news|title=台灣最美麗的風景是人　真的嗎？ (Taiwan is one of the most beautiful landscapes, really?)|url=http://www.appledaily.com.tw/realtimenews/article/life/20140731/443613/%E5%8F%B0%E7%81%A3%E6%9C%80%E7%BE%8E%E9%BA%97%E7%9A%84%E9%A2%A8%E6%99%AF%E6%98%AF%E4%BA%BA%E3%80%80%E7%9C%9F%E7%9A%84%E5%97%8E%EF%BC%9F|accessdate=6 August 2014|publisher=[[Apple Daily]] (Taiwanese edition)|date=31 July 2014|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6RcFSMpvN|archivedate=6 August 2014|language=Chinese}}</ref>

A good example of Polandball is the comic titled [http://polandball.cc/comic/the-element-of-surprise/ Element of surprise] where each country presents the mineral named after itself, where for example Germany presents [[Germanium]], European Union [[Europium]], while Poland shows radioactive [[Polonium]], which causes other Polandball countries to die - apart from Ukraine, who claims it is resistant to [[radioactivity]] what is a reference to the [[Chernobyl_disaster]].

== Assessment ==
[[File:Crucifixion (Corpus Hypercubus).png|thumb|upright|An example of a Polandball comic which references ''[[Crucifixion (Corpus Hypercubus)]]'' by [[Salvador Dalí]], and which illustrates the Polish martyrdom stereotype as described by Wojciech Oleksiak. Israel and Jews in general are traditionally shown as a cube.]]
A report on [[Vesti FM]] noted a post on [[Livejournal]] which asked readers to list five images that come to mind when thinking of Poland or [[Poles]]. The five pages of responses, illustrating the deep historical ties between Russia and Poland, recalled subjects including [[False Dmitriy I]], ''Tomek in the Land of the Kangaroos'' by Polish author [[Alfred Szklarski]], ''[[Czterej pancerni i pies]]'' ("Four tank-men and a dog"), [[Russophobia]] and Polandball.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Klava|first1=P.|script-title=ru:Польша у россиян ассоциируется с Лжедмитрием и Польшаром|url=http://radiovesti.ru/episode/show/episode_id/22667|accessdate=8 November 2014|work=[[Vesti FM]]|date=25 August 2013|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6Tvc8mT6B|archivedate=8 November 2014|language=Russian}}</ref>

Wojciech Oleksiak, writing on culture.pl, a project of the Polish government-funded [[Adam Mickiewicz Institute]] which has the aim of promoting Polish language and culture abroad, noted that due to anyone being able to create a Polandball comic, the existence of the meme has created new opportunities for people to express their personal views on race, religion and history. In describing Polandball as an example of ''par excellence'' on the Internet, he further stated that comic plots can be "rude, impolite, racist, abusive, or just plain dumb", whilst also noting that the [[political incorrectness|politically incorrect]] nature of the comics add to the attractiveness of the meme.<ref name="casestudy">{{cite news|last1=Oleksiak|first1=Wojciech|title=Polandball — A Case Study|url=http://culture.pl/en/article/polandball-a-case-study|accessdate=6 August 2014|work=Culture.pl|publisher=[[Adam Mickiewicz Institute]]|date=9 June 2014|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/6RcFd8k2j|archivedate=6 August 2014}}</ref>

At the same time, Oleksiak notes that Polandball comics often employ exaggerated Polish stereotypes, such as Poles not being as proficient in English as other nationalities, and Poland itself being a country full of dull-witted psycho-Catholics. On the other hand, some stereotypes employed in Polandball comics, such as Poles telling stories about the nation's glorious history and dwelling on a deep rooted martyrdom, is mostly true, whilst the stereotype that Poles hold many national complexes and blames external forces for their own failures is true, but somewhat justified.<ref name=casestudy />

Oleksiak further notes that from Polandball, Poles can learn to have "a sense of humour about our long-time grudges".<ref name=casestudy />

== See also ==
* ''[[Hetalia: Axis Powers]]''
* [[Polish joke]]
{{Portalbar|Comedy|Internet|Poland}}

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

== External links ==
{{Commons category|Polandball}}
* [http://www.reddit.com/r/polandball Polandball] at [[reddit]]
* [http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/polandball Polandball] at [[Knowyourmeme]]
* [http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?167916-Polandball-anyone Polandball] at militaryphotos.net

[[Category:Internet memes]]
[[Category:2000s webcomics]]
[[Category:2009 introductions]]
[[Category:Satirical comics]]
[[Category:Political satire]]
[[Category:Ethnic and racial stereotypes]]
[[Category:National personifications]]
[[Category:Political internet memes]]
[[Category:Poland in fiction]]
[[Category:Works about Poland]]
[[Category:Fictional Polish people]]
[[Category:Fictional balls]]

Countryballs

2015-02-01T01:00:08Z

89.76.8.142: /* Other countries */ element of surprise