User talk:OXONSchoolView

Hi OXONSchoolView! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message automatically delivered by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 04:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your edits. You're doing some great work tidying up post-nominals. It is, though, house style to put a comma between the end of somebody's name and the beginning of their post-nominal letters, eg General Sir Joe Bloggs, GCB, CBE, DSO... The comma just denotes the end of the name, and the post-noms should normally be part a subordinate clause, with another comma after them before the sentence continues. The shortcut to the relevant part of the style guide is "MOS:POSTNOM" in case you don't want to take my word for it. ;) If you think the guide is wrong, you can start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies, and the consensus might (or might not, I honestly don't know) agree with you. Please don't remove any more commas between names and post-noms, but please do keep up your otherwise excellent work. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! I wasn't aware of the protocol for commas - I hope that I haven't done too much damage! Will continue to edit by adding the template, keeping commas in mind. OXONSchoolView (talk) 16:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys, could we put a hold on this post-nom tidying for a while and discuss? I think this template is a bit problematic as it works now. Harry, I agree there should be a comma between name and post-noms, however I think that's only applied in the real world when the noms are printed full-size, i.e. "Joe Bloggs, CBE, DSO, DFC". In that case, of course, all the post-noms are comma separated. When post-noms are small, I've always seen them as having no commas anywhere. Now I think it's more common to use full-size post-noms separated by commas, and after I jumped up and down a bit a while back the country=AUS parameter of the template started to allow for this, e.g. if you code "Joe Bloggs, {{post-nominals|country=AUS|CBE,|DSO,|DFC|size=100%}}" then you get "Joe Bloggs, CBE, DSO, DFC". I find that when you use the country=GBR parameter, you can employ size=100% but it seems to get its knickers in a knot if put a comma after each post-nom. So perhaps we need to ask the template people to allow for commas in the GBR version as well as the AUS one, since the rules should be the same. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to pause and wait for a consensus before doing any others. One of the main problems, that I have come across, is that there is very little consistency. Some are 100%, some small, some have commas between post-noms, some have commas between names and post-noms. I think a single template should be developed that we can then apply uniformly. That is what I was attempting to do... OXONSchoolView (talk) 13:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tks, I've posted this at the template doc page. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, further developments/discussion at the template doc page if you're interested... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Dudley Skelton, OXONSchoolView!

Wikipedia editor DocumentError just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

nice article

To reply, leave a comment on DocumentError's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hello OXONSchoolView, and welcome to Wikipedia. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, WP:OVERLINK points out that names of "Major geographic features and locations ..." should not usually be linked, so I've reverted your change to Girls' Day School Trust. PamD 00:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bloxham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wigginton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

OXONSchoolView (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I appear to have been blocked by mistake, for something related to User:MariaJaydHicky, of whom I have no knowledge and have never encountered. It might be an IP overlap issue...

Decline reason:

Hello. There is no block on this account so you are likely being hit by an autoblock. In order to clear this block I need you to post the unblock template given to you in the block notification. Chillum 23:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

OXONSchoolView (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

Block evasion: user:MariaJaydHicky

• Blocking administrator: Diannaa (talk • blocks)

---

Accept reason: User is not MariaJaydHicky. Granting user IP block exemption. Diannaa (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you OXON. I am going to consult with the administrator who put the block on those IPs. @Diannaa: I suspect this is collateral damage given the age of the account and the lack of block history. Do you think the range block should be set to anon only or do you think IP block exemption is better? If you think the range block has hit its target then let me know and I will take that into account. Chillum 18:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MariaJaydHicky has access to other ranges of IPs and seems to travel throughout that area of England; she frequently creates named accounts in addition to using IPs to edit; hence the way the range block was implemented. Perhaps it would be best to grant the IP block exemption for OXONSchoolView, and remove the range block later if other editors turn out to be affected. OXONSchoolView, please accept my apologies for the inconvenience. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC) I've gone ahead and granted the IP block exemption, so you should be able to edit again. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick response Diannaa. OXONSchoolView I hope you understand this was an unavoidable error caused by IP overlap and was not meant to hit you. I hope you continue to contribute to the project. Chillum 18:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your quick responses and action. Please don't apologise - I'd much rather these things occasionally happened by accident than such blocking procedures were not in place! OXONSchoolView (talk) 23:10, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi OXONSchoolView. I have removed the IP block exemption as the range block was altered after a second user complained. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! (OXONSchoolView (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]