User talk:Wereon

Archive 1

Just so you know, 'humourous' is the correct spelling of 'humorous' in UK/International English ('humour' (UK, versus 'humor') + 'ous'). Not that it really matters.

Now that that's out of the way, we should have a chat about a certain word called Irony, since I was born and currently located in Midwest USA...--SirNuke 06:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/humorous?view=uk

In British English, -our words change to -or when certain suffixes are added. -ize and -ous are the most common ones. Ah, sweet irony... —Wereon 15:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA, that is awesome. --Padishar 08:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irony illustrated *grin*. MikeBeckett (talk) 14:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, if I'd have remembered uploading it, I would have changed it myself by now! Alexj2002 23:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ey up, let's sup, 82.25.23.38 20:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Appen. —Wereon 18:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I was adding the infobox to an article at the time and couldn't get a preview of what I had added before saving. Mrsteviec 12:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the good work on the gb thumbs - someone noticed you! Cheers --Nigel ^(Talk) 13:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. — Wereon 13:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The yellow dot on the map no longers shows the right place. Thought you might want the chance to fix it rather than a revert. Cheers, Pgr94 14:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wereon,

Thanks for the clarification re. svg. You'll see if you look at the Beethoven Fifth article that you've been reverted again--but not by me. The problem is that if you group the eighth notes/quavers as 1 + 2, you're deviating from the score, and (I believe I'm right in saying this), it also looks very odd to classical musicians.

So what I'd suggest is that you study the LilyPond manual and learn how to group these notes all together as a group of three. My understanding is that it's a very sophisticated software package and it surely has this capability.

Yours very truly, Opus33 01:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Below is the correct lilypond source. I have made a png of it at Image:Beethoven symphony 5 opening new.png but unfortunately my lilypond is not currently able to export as svg. Wereon - could you please use this code to make a new svg? Jobrahms 15:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

\version "2.8.7" \layout { ragged-right = ##t } {  \clef treble  \key c \minor  \time 2/4  r8 g'8 [ g'8 g'8 ] |  ees'2\fermata |  r8 f'8 [ f'8 f'8 ] |  d'2 ( |  d'2\fermata ) | } 

Thanks for the ly2svg script. I've tried pstoedit in the past (without much success) but not thought of going via the sketch format. Interesting that lilypond's ps output doesn't work as direct input to pstoedit. Jobrahms 09:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your talk page on Commons. --Ptr ru 08:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just wanted to let you know that when you nominate an image for deletion, you also have to notify the original uploader of the pending deletion. You can use the template {{idw|Image:Example.png}} to do it. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 22:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message on my discussion page. My knowledge about copyright problems is hardly abecadarian so I really cannot really estimate the situation. I'm just confused about what now shall happen with images like Image:Caught Somewhere In Time Gitarren for wikipedia.png. Will they have to be deleted, too? --Gardini 18:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably. — Wereon 19:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that's the point in the category stateless people. Amoruso 10:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

England is not independent ?? Amoruso 10:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland each elect MPs to sit in the British Parliament in Westminster. In addition, all except England have their own national parliaments or assemblies. As such, England is actually the least independent of the countries of the United Kingdom.

I'm going to uncategorize Welsh people and Scottish people, as it seems that you misunderstood the constitution of the United Kingdom. If you still want them to be tagged so, I recommend you try and gain a community consensus first, as it definitely seems POV-pushing to me. — Wereon 10:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well that seems a very strange view since England is the basis of the United Kingdom and it is England who conquered Wales and Scotland, so of course England in itself doesn't need a parliament of any sort. This is of course according to history and to facts, so this game on words is meaningless I think. The idea is obvious. I don't mind the category one way or another , but one can't deny that these countries are conquered and aren't indepedent. If Welsh people have so little nationalist feelings and care for that, then that's their choice. Amoruso 10:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

England did not conquer Scotland. The Scottish king James VI became King of England in 1603 with the death of his cousin, Elizbeth I, merging the crowns to form the Kingdom of Great Britain. The Parliaments of the two countries were merged with the Acts of Union of 1707. No offence, but your view of politics is very polarized. If a people view themselves as having a state, then they do - that should be the only criterion. You cannot impose your own views on Wikipedia. — Wereon 10:59, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Kingdom of Scotland was an independent state until 1 May 1707, when the Acts of Union resulted in a political union with the Kingdom of England to create the Kingdom of Great Britain. Hence, Scotland is under occupation. What you're saying is similar to the notion that the states of the USSR weren't conquered by Russia. Of course that's not true. I'm also referring you to this : Scottish independence is advocated by the political movement of Scottish people that desires that Scotland secede from the United Kingdom and once again become a sovereign independent state as it was prior to 1707. This also developed this for example : Scottish National Liberation Army. They might have a state but as a seperate people they don't. Again, I won't fight to include them in the category, though it is a fact. You can also read this : Wars of Scottish Independence and also see popular movies depicting Scotland's battles against the attempts of England to conquer it... attempts that were eventually lost like you mention with the Acts of Union. Amoruso 11:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be the Acts of Union passed by both the Scottish and English parliaments, then? That's the friendliest occupation that I've ever heard of. Surely occupation implies at the very least some kind of imposed military presence? Comparing the make-up of the United Kingdom to that of the USSR is ludicrous, and is tantamount to an invocation of an altered version of Godwin's law. You are perfectly free to hold the opinion that the Scots and the Welsh are "stateless people", as long as you do not let this POV colour what you do on Wikipedia.

And, regarding the Scottish Wars of Independence, prior conflicts are irrelevant. Ultimately, England and Scotland were in union due to political rather than military reasons. That is not an occupation of Scotland! — Wereon 11:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see no difference between this union and the differnet soviet unions. In effect, you're describing the selling out of the scottish leaders of the time. Seems strange you dismiss the obvious occupation when Scotland was attacked, raped, and occupied numerous times by the British in the history. Strange that it did stop once the UK was formed. It's pretty obvious what went on. Anyway, many Scots feel that they're occupied by the English and say so as well. Amoruso 11:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A quote from a popular movie :) Trainspotting  : Amoruso 11:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"It's shite being Scottish!

We're the lowest of the low!

The scum of the fucking Earth!

The most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash..

that was ever shat into civilization!

Some people hate English. I don't! They're just wankers!

We, on the other hand, are colonized by wankers!

Can't even find a decent culture to be colonized by!

We're ruled by effete arseholes!

It's a shite state of affairs to be in, Tommy! "

Funnily enough, that quote and book had sprung to mind. But this opinion is hardly universal in Scotland. Note the failure of the SNP in Scotland compared to, for example, Sinn Féin in the Irish (UK) general election, 1918. In addition, it may interest you to know that out of the four holders of the Great Offices of State in Britain, three were born in Scotland, as was our Lord Chancellor. In contrast, as far as I know, the Scottish Parliament is populated entirely by Scots. That does not suggest an English occupation of Scotland. In fact, it suggests exactly the reverse. — Wereon 11:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely understand that this view isn't universal, which is exactly what prompted these folks to say that they're wretched and miserable, it's because they don't do anything about it. I believe Sean Connery for instance holds a nationalist view too. The mixture of ministers etc does not suggest sovereignity of course. There were Ukrainian in the Soviet centres as well etc. btw, the capital city of BOTH england and UK is London which shows what it's about... IMHO. Also I doubt whether there was EVER an ENGLISH person who claimed that England is not indepedent, where as there were Irish, Scottish and Welsh movements who declared that. It's their culture that was suffocated and oppressed into the english center from london. Amoruso 12:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English nationalism — Wereon 13:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know ! As another user pointed out to me, maybe English people do need to be in the same category. Amoruso 14:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wereon. Thanks for replacing the dotty map on my Work in progress page. How do the dynamic maps work? The X & Y coordinates (MapX = 134, MapY = 174) don't appear to have anything to do with the Grid Ref for Creeton (TF013201) or the Lat & Long, which is about 52 46'N 0 30'W. SiGarb | Talk 17:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You also seem to have replaced the static maps with dynamic maps on hundreds of pages on my watchlist (around Chew Valley & the Mendip Hills). I would be interested to know how you identify the X & Y coordinates (so that I can do it on other pages) & what the advantage of the dynamic maps is? Does this relate to the fact that I put many of them on Placeopedia recently - if so why hasn't it included all the ones I did eg all of the Locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal?— Rod ^talk 20:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just corrected your entry for Shipham which had the wrong population, district council and parliamentary constituency. --Cheesy Mike 11:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:BBC Logo 1997-Present.svg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that it remains unused because .svg images are not "low resolution" and therefore cannot be considered "fair use" under our rules. See WP:FU for more information. Thanks! ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your GB thumb maps do not work. It just shows as a blank map of the British Isles. Please stop inserting them. People cant see where places are.

I don't imagine it's intentional, one of us would have to check the source or a score. The rests are either a by product of the limits of Sibelius or appeared that way in the book (I lean towards the first). Hyacinth 07:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You edit conflicted me during the same minute I was removing blatant vandalism [1] -- rest assured I was "being careful". Thanks, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wereon. I saw you made Image:Pinyin Tone Chart.svg, an svg version of my original png file. Thanks a lot! It looks really great and will be easy to modify for porting the image to Chinese Wikibooks in other languages.

I'd also like to request another conversion from you for a related image, Image:Half-third Pinyin Tone Chart.png. It should be very easy to create from Pinyin Tone Chart.svg, because only one line needs repositioning.

— Everlong 02:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This map Image:Death penalty statutes in the United States.svg has several problems which have been noted on the talk page (on Commons). Could you correct these? It is a good looking map if only it were accurate. Rmhermen 03:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Fantastic_four_by_jack_kirby.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Humourous" is a perfectly valid British spelling. In an article on a British subject, it is appropriate to use British (humourous) rather than American (humorous) spellings. Fan-1967 19:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find it as a valid spelling all over the place: [2] [3]. Many list it as an alternate spelling, but perfectly acceptable. This says a lot of people are using it. Fan-1967 20:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please create a new image for me. That is Image:Al-Liwaa.svg make text color white and background black. It is also another flag used by early Muslims. Please reply me if you think you can do that for me. regards. --- ALM 16:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.. Thank you. :). Thanks [4] --- ALM 17:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Napster-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The SVGs you made for Core fonts for the Web look great! TMC1221 19:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly. Most of them are Atanamir's, though. — Wereon 19:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i found your post on ALM user page there i found this "White shahadah on black background" it is really beauitful.Just wanted to Say Well Done. Khalidkhoso 02:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to take the credit, but all I did was extract it from the flag of Saudi Arabia, and changed the colours. —Wereon 12:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The {{fairuse}} tag is deprecated. Please don't add it to images. Use a more specific fair-use tag or {{Non-free fair use in}} instead. Thanks! —Chowbok ☠ 04:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edinburgh university crest.svg

Hi, thinks for uploading Image:Edinburgh university crest.svg, its a very good image. However, I've been working on the commons:University of Edinburgh page and I think the crest should definitely be there instead. Could you please upload it to commons and remove it from Wikipedia? Use the tag {{subst:ncd|image name on Commons}} Thanks, Jack · talk · 12:53, Thursday, 15 February 2007

I beg to differ with your claim that "PC" is only used of peers. Try putting "Rt Hon" and "PC MP" into Google and see what you come up with - Tonys Benn and Blair are emphatically not peers. Can you point to a reference for your contention? I'd dig out my copy of Whitaker, but it's at home and I'm at work. Philip Trueman 20:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right! You're right! It's on p.122 of this year's Whitaker. Sorry for the bother. Philip Trueman 10:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits of Mendip Hills. I have now put it up as a Featured Article Candidate & comments, support or opposition is being recorded at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mendip Hills.— Rod ^talk 10:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I updated Image:2005UKElectionMap.svg on commons.
There were a few issues I was wondering if you could resolve for me.

1) Each region is translated. Why is this? Can they not all be in the correct relative position to start with.
2) The Orkney & Shetland islands are not translated, when these really ought to be! Can you move them to their correct positions, then do a translate on the new group I have surrounded them & their frame with.
3) What do all the "seat-nnn" IDs mean? Is there some significance to these numbers? If not, can you change the IDs to the name of the constituency.
4) I got rid of all the inkscape and sodipod crap that the code was filled with. Why on earth did you leave this in?

— Nicholas (reply) @ 14:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why on Earth would I waste my time doing such things, which would not change a single pixel? If you care so much, be bold and do it yourself. — Wereon 17:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well for one it allows the map to be more easily reused. SVG is not just about drawing pixels onto the screen. Any old bitmap or vector format can do that. Its greatest asset is that it is XML, able to be edited and manipulated by javascript, and used in a multitude of interesting ways. See for example the entry on this page (and play the game, based on the wikipedia world map). If you don't understand this then you have overlooked the most basic benefits of the format. — Nicholas (reply) @ 17:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The basic benefit of SVG is its ability to look pretty at any size. Regarding XML, I understand but really don't care. If you want to make a "Find the Constituency" game, fine, go ahead. — Wereon 19:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GBmap-named and Template:GBdot-small have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the templates' entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -Pit-yacker 19:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GBthumb-bare and Template:GBthumb2 have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the templates' entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Pit-yacker 14:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have an impeccable source, the web site of the Liberal Judaism movement [5]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Newport (talk • contribs) 11:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That's fine, but you must link to the source in the article! — Wereon 17:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a poll on Talk:Fred Dibnah with four options for his birthplace area. As you've edited the main Fred Dibnah article, I'm letting you know about this Poll and the chance to vote one of the options. Cwb61 (talk) 00:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Smoke_on_the_water.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 22:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the the word "affairs" carries an overtone of sexual liaisons. I imagine such relationships do exist in the school but I thought "joint enterprises" was more precise in the context. BTLizard 07:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you created SVG versions of the generic kit items for the template. Have you done any work on any of the other kit, or do you plan to? I hate the existing PNGs, but I didn't want to redo anything. — cBuckley (Talk • Contribs) 15:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, don't have time, sorry. I've done the hard bit now, though, and it should be easy to recreate the hundreds of other images as necessary in Inkscape. — Wereon 18:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, good, thanks! --Amandajm 05:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, wait, I've thought about this! You left a question in the box where you made the changes. It was a totally inhumane question which I take umbrage against. If I justify my choice of words, I'm going to look like an absolute willie wonka. If I tell you the truth I'm going to look like a total fool.... so I'll just leave your changes where they are and pretend I haven't noticed them....--Amandajm 10:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Conservative logo 2006.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 10:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the purpose for this fair use image. In future cases, maybe this template is usefull to you: Template:Non-free media rationale. – Ilse@ 11:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:White_shahadah_on_black.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 22:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've recently put Chew Stoke up as a Featured Article candidate. As you have edited this article in the past I wondered if you would like to make any comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chew Stoke?— Rod ^talk 07:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:TOTP Logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (spebi · talk) 23:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Take Five piano intro.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 17:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wereon, thats a fantastic UK election map you have made. I was just wondering if you could answer a question about it, as I see you said you created it in Inkscape. How did you make it so that each district is a separate shape? I noticed when looking at it in inkscape that every single district can be selected & moved separately, and they all align up perfectly. How did you do this?! This might be something really easy but I cant see how to do it. I have made svgs before, but have not found a way to easily split the outlines into individual shapes. (the only way I could think would be to break each path at every single joining point, duplicate them then select the paths for each shape and combine them, but this would take a ridiculous amount of time) I have had to save files as pngs and then colour them in photoshop - like with Image:NSW 2007 election Sydney.png. If you could help with this it would be appreciated --Astrokey44 11:32, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice, I will have a look at the sites you have linked, though I dont know much about geographic data - am more into the historical and design aspects of maps. Just about the difference tool, when two areas are selected this deletes one and keeps the other, rather than fixing the boundaries of both? I also just then discovered the bitmap trace tool in inkscape which seems to trace fairly well, and it keeps the areas separate after you select 'break apart'. --Astrokey44 11:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:BR-logo.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Rob-manuel-sitting_270.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 23:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wereon, you recently edited "Russell Watson" to state that Salford, where Watson was born, is in the county of Lancashire. However, the article "Salford" itself states that Salford is in Greater Manchester. I don't know enough about English counties. Could you resolve this confusion? Is the "Salford" article wrong? Let's discuss the matter further at "Talk:Russell Watson#Which county is Salford in?" Cheers, Jacklee 23:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. I noticed that you changed the {{flagicon}} from a British to an English flag. This seems to go against the consensus in "Wikipedia:Use of flags in articles" that the use of a flag to indicate the place of birth is confusing, as readers may mistake this for an indication of nationality. I think it may be clearer to use the British flag and to reinsert "UK" at the end of the place-of-birth sentence. Cheers, Jacklee 23:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you update this image, please? :-) -- Kangel 12:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that a wikipedia mod has removed most of the B3ta page and then protected it. Their reasons (on talk b3ta) appear to be petty. As someone who's made a lot of reasonable edits on the page in the past, it would be great if you could look into this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.67.246 (talk) 14:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the Rob Manuel article appears to have been removed without debate, or following any of the normal policies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.67.246 (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ANClogo.svg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Lara❤Love 14:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Freedom of Information Act.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Jza84 · (talk) 12:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.

At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars

If you are interested by all means feel free to join

Regards

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 18:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to say thanks for your Image:ManchesterBuildingsHeight.svg image, it looks much better than mine so thank you! _└^and-rew_┘^┌_talk^┐ 22:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, you're welcome! —Wereon (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I'd also like to thank you for this! It's great work! Do you think you'd be willing and able to put something together for a proposed Salford list at all??? -- Jza84 · (talk) 23:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Wereon

Thank you for your recent change to Image:EP_constituency.svg. That image is used by Template:Location_map_European_Parliament_constituencies_2007 to produce a location map usable by the over 60 constituencies in force in the European Union as at December 2007. A brief scan of those constituencies revealed the stretch you applied caused problems which included:

• The Masovian (European Parliament constituency) of Poland ended up pointing to the Podlachian and Warmian-Masurian (European Parliament constituency) of Poland
• The Podlachian and Warmian-Masurian (European Parliament constituency) of Poland ended up pointing to Kaliningrad (a Russian exclave which isn't part of the EU)
• The Pomeranian (European Parliament constituency) of Poland ended up pointing to the Baltic Sea
• Denmark (European Parliament constituency) ended up pointing to the North Sea or, even worse, Norway (a country that isn't in the EU, has had two referendums on joining the EU and has had a government fall over the issue)
• The East France (European Parliament constituency) of France ended up pointing to the French-speaking electoral college of Belgium
• The French-speaking electoral college of Belgium ended up pointing to the Dutch-speaking electoral college of Belgium
• The German-speaking electoral college of Belgium ended up pointing to the Netherlands (European Parliament constituency)
• Bulgaria (European Parliament constituency) ended up pointing to Romania (European Parliament constituency)

For that reason, I have reverted your change.

I understand and agree with your desire to produce a clearer map. I also note that a vertical stretch of a location map can work (from memory, Scotland and Russia both use a 150% vertical stretch for their location maps). But if you wish to reintroduce a stretch, you wil have to do the following:

• 1) The stretch has to be applied evenly to an equidistant cylindrical map (such as Image:EP_constituency.svg was before your change): do not use a Mercator projection, because they don't work with Template:location map.
• 2) The top,right,bottom and left edges need to be the same before and after: if they are not, then Template:Location_map_European_Parliament_constituencies_2007 will need to be changed to compensate.
• 3) You will have to check all of the constituencies it affects (see Template:European_Parliament_constituencies_2004-2009 for a full list: there are currently over 60) and fix all those your change may have broken.

If I may make a humorous observation at this point, the problems caused by your change would have restarted World War II, caused a civil war in Belgium, recreated the Warsaw Pact and started World war III...<grin>

Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 16:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wereon,

I am reading an article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages. The image "IndoEuropeanTreeA.svg‎" is unclear. I understand from the file history that you uploaded it. Can you direct to / provide an improved file?

Many thanks, Gregory Brown —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.151.251.107 (talk) 07:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:Rhulcoa.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 20:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You previously tagged this page with a notability check. You may wish to comment at the AfD debate taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Shenton. Martín (saying/doing) 18:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice new map for Chippenham (UK Parliament constituency). Thank you. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Many more coming shortly... —Wereon (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you get the data from? (If you think I should not ask, just forget to answer.) --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have just replaced some of my maps that I added last year...with ones that appear to me to be pretty similar. I already had them updated for the boundary changes. Has anything changed? Richard B (talk) 13:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am gradually uploading all of the new constituency maps, and replaced yours for consistency with the others, both in style (line width etc.) and naming. The new ones are slightly higher quality, too. —Wereon (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it's thanks from me, to both of you, I never knew who did the constituency maps till now =) doktorb _words^deeds 19:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I realise that this would be a lot of work but you might want to look at it. Maybe you could meld your maps with the existing district maps in which urban areas are shown. For example, the constituency map of Milton Keynes North is just a flat colour. Thus it is not possible to see that the urban area of Milton Keynes has been split so that the constituency consists both of urban and rural areas of the borough. It would aid undertanding if it were, I think. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's not a bad idea. I don't have a (vector) source at the moment for urban areas; I'll have a look at OpenStreetMap. —Wereon (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oreet mate - cheers for the help on Glasgow East. I tried my hardest to keep up with the votes, and I think the gain/loss box works properly. I thought I'd worked the swing out but hah, it's late, and these cans of Relentless are wearing off! Cheers for the help, here's to the next by-election! doktorb _words^deeds 01:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. It can certainly be hectic, especially around declaration time! See you again for Kircaldy and Cowdenbeath by-election, 2008... —Wereon (talk) 22:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yeah, I'll get the Labour leadership election, 2008 article ready too, yeah? On the declaration issue, I did try just prior to the vote declaration to alter the table to SNP/Lab/Con/LibDem, as this was likely to be the result, making it a little easier/quicker to fill in the votes, but by the time I had done all that, there was an edit conflict and....well, hilarity ensued. Is there a "Hang on, don't all edit at once" template, and if not...could we not create one? doktorb _words^deeds 17:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that "PC" is not just used for peers. It is indeed commonly only used for peers, for the simple reason that non-peer members of the Privy Council almost invariably use "Rt Hon" before their names. However, in circumstances (such as Wikipedia) when honorifics are not used, it is perfectly acceptable to use the postnominal letters to indicate membership. This is done in, for instance, Who's Who, and may also be found in a number of other sources (for instance, in the order of service of the official memorial service for Ernest Bevin at Westminster Abbey he is described as "Ernest Bevin, PC"). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See [6], [7]. Consensus on Wikipedia seems to be against using "PC" for commoners. If you can forge a new consensus, I would be happy to oblige.

I was just about to quote Debrett's and link you to [8], but it appears that you actually contributed to the debate, in which it seems there was a consensus against your view.

I accept your view, and see the legitimacy of your argument, but shan't adhere to it unless you can garner support. —Wereon (talk) 13:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there was any consensus - the debate was in any case about whether or not we should use "Rt Hon", not "PC", and resulted in no change to the guidelines. What I said above holds true - "Rt Hon" is usually used, but since it is still not on Wikipedia, "PC" is acceptable, as a number of sources show. Deleting information (i.e. the indicator of membership of the Privy Council) is not particularly productive. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Bsimmons666 (talk) ^Friend? 23:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ceremonial county switch- it brings wiki inline with reality. ClemRutter (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. —Wereon (talk) 12:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

could you update your image at File:Browser_Wars.svg to include 2007 and 2008? — Nicholas (reply) @ 23:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I can't remember where I got my data from. If you find out, and have figures (calculated the same way) for 2007 and 2008, I will. — Wereon (talk) 12:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I've been using personal names alongside titles to avoid the repetition of titles. I like your solution of using "Lord X" at the top and their title under their seat. Warofdreams talk 15:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely sourced! Bradley0110 (talk) 12:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Masskara.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your edit on the list of MPs. Parliaments are numbered, from the 1st Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801 through to the current, 54th Parliament, as can be seen from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/chron.htm --George Burgess (talk) 21:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you've found one source. They're not; the typical assumption is that the Parliament of UK was the Parliament of GB plus the Irish MPs; similarly that the Parliament of GB was the Parliament of England, with the addition of the Scottish MPs. Calling the present Parliament the fifty-fourth is deliberately obfuscatory; no-one knows it as such. –Wereon (talk) 21:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ask User:The JPS. Bradley0110 (talk) 19:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Re your edit at Districts of England. What you say re mayoralty and borough/city status being linked used to be true, but since the innovation of optional directly elected mayors it isn't. For instance, Mansfield, which is only a district, has a mayor now. Not sure if there any other examples. In places that already had mayors, the adoption of the new system has displaced the existing mayoralty. Newham now has a "civic ambassador" who wears the old chains and gowns and does all the traditional mayoral stuff, while I believe Middlesbrough has a "speaker". So what I'm getting around to saying is we need to reflect this in the article :-) Lozleader (talk) 12:47, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I never knew that. Thanks for letting me know! —Wereon (talk) 21:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see and comment regarding your recent to the cameron article Talk:David_Cameron#regarding_the_last_edit_by_Wereon_.28.E2.86.92Standing_in_opinion_polls:_ComRes_are_irrelevant_-_they_have_been_completely_discredited.29 . (Off2riorob (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I like your British Isles outline map which is the largest on Wikimedia, but I am wondering if there is a version somewhere without the line between the UK and Ireland... like one that could be used for more geological or historical reasons.--Dchmelik (talk) 11:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit. Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. . Removing tags is not minor. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be silly.

Advising against marking non-minor edits as minor is not silly. Also, do not remove citation requests without providing the requested citations, or without gaining consensus for their removal on the talk page Talk:Heptalogy. You made a bold edit (mistakenly marking it as minor), it was reverted, and now should be discussed. See WP:BRD. -- JHunterJ (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. You added the 'notability' template to this article; I have examined it, and agree that she is not notable. I have nominated it for deletion; your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jody Dunn (2nd nomination). Robofish (talk) 22:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, have left a comment. —Wereon (talk) 22:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you are aware that this category, which was renamed per your nomination, has been nominated for deletion here. Mhockey (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Wereon (talk) 22:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for a vector-based constituency map of the entire UK. I've seen your 2005 election map but couldn't find anything else. Have you done one? --Gangle (talk) 12:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the next election? Have a look at File:2005UKElectionNominalMap.svg. It's the old results on the new boundaries.

Wereon (talk) 14:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

Thanks to the Boundary Commission's meddling; your wonderful maps are now incorrect in Birmingham. Birmingham has gone down from 11 constituencies to 10. Here's an image of a map showing the new boundaries: http://www.boundarycommissionforengland.org.uk/review_areas/West_Midlands_Boroughs/images/Birmingham_OM_RR.gif

Thanks, Umbongo91 (Umbongo91 (talk) 16:36, 11 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hi there. I've started work on this list, with the ultimate aim of taking it to a similar standard to List of Parliamentary constituencies in Hertfordshire. Having made my initial sweep, I've realised that the keys of the two tables I merged don't match due to the renaming of Blaby. I was therefore wondering if you would be able to change the numbering scheme of File:LeicestershireParliamentaryConstituenciesNumbered.svg to match File:LeicestershireRutlandParliamentaryConstituencies2007.svg? Regards, WFCforLife (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Wereon (talk) 19:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! WFCforLife (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How random is this, I was just viewing the Ross Kemp article and you were the last person to edit it. Shame I missed Top Gear last night, would have caught onto the joke sooner. Saw you in Tesco the other day, hope you're well M1ke (talk) 09:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weron can you please explain how you came to close this debate after only 4 hours, which incidentally was a bare 16 minutes after after a few of the previous opposers (not all opposers mind) in the 7 day debate a few days ago where notified of the new debate. Thank you - Galloglass 18:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin. User:Anthony Appleyard moved the page, and I too was rather surprised that he acted so quickly. You'd have to ask him (and, indeed, I see you have). Presumably he, not unreasonably, snowballed it; in retrospect, I should have listed it as an uncontroversial move.

The difference between the two debates is, of course, that in the meantime a 2009 GE moved from being a practical impossibility to being a legal impossibility. 19:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and regarding your particular reason for opposing the move, I'm afraid I don't follow your logic at all. We do have United States presidential election, 2012 after all, despite the fact that it could be deferred by a constitutional amendment. The chances of the Commons, the Lords, and HM choosing to delay the election is of a similar probability. Wereon (talk) 19:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weron what I am questioning here is your closure of the discussion with indecent haste to say the least. So please answer the question I posed above as to why you closed this debate a bare 16 minutes after its proposer notified me and other opposers on our talk pages? - Galloglass 20:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Galogals, don't shoot the messenger. I closed the discussion because Anthony Appleyard moved the page. The deed was done. Wereon (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence in this [9] diff rather points to you pre-judging the debate. This reeks of bad faith on your part to say the least. - Galloglass 22:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Galloglass, I am getting increasingly frustrated with your behaviour on this issue, and am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are being deliberately obtuse. Trolling, if you will. The next general election in Britain will be in 2010. If you accept that, then this whole debate is pointless, academic. If you don't - well, do some reading around, because you are wrong. Wereon (talk) 23:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed you are changing the links to Next United Kingdom general election. I'd just like to inform you that a bot has been set up and is currently waiting approvel to do this. See here Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DASHBot 2. Just to let you know. --Philip Stevens (talk) 18:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh brilliant, thanks. Should save me quite a bit of work. Wereon (talk) 18:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wereon. I have added a source for Richard Onslow being nicknamed "Stiff Dick" - I can certainly see why you questioned it! Dasent's book is reliable but somewhat dated - importantly, though, its copyright has expired and the text is available for those who wish to check it online. I recall seeing this fact recorded in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography article on Onslow - their website is subscription only and mine has expired, so I cannot check their source. Let me know if I can be of any further help. Rje (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rje. Yes, I thought it was vandalism! I've had a look at the DNB at it is indeed mentioned there - I'll add the reference to the article later. Wereon (talk) 14:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you very much. Rje (talk) 15:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the work you did in tidying up the above article with this edit, however you marked the edit as "minor" - I think you may not understand what a minor edit is. To help you may want to take a look at WP:MINOR, taken from the page :

• Checking the minor edit box signifies that the current and previous versions differ only superficially (typographical corrections, etc.), in a way that no editor would be expected to regard as disputable.
• Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if the edit concerns a single word, and it is improper to mark such an edit as minor.

In this case you did change the meaning of an article by removing ref to the party names, please do not misunderstand, the edit improved the article just was not a WP:MINOR one.

Just thourght that you may like to know.

Codf1977 (talk) 05:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. But, each to his own... Wereon (talk) 13:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No idead if this is how you're meant to send a message on here, so sorry if not!

I noticed you uploaded a map of the notional 2005 British General Election results on the 2010 boundaries. I was wondering if you have the Shapefile (.shp) or know where it came from?

THanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slowleft (talk • contribs) 15:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately not - it's hand-traced from the raster files released by the Boundary Commissions. It's thus not terribly accurate, though it should be alright to within a quarter of a mile or so.

Have a look at this press release, though: [10]. It looks like the Ordnance Survey will be releasing their mid-level vector data sometime later this year. Wereon (talk) 17:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's the man, the man with the Midas touch A spider's touch Such a cold finger Beckons you to enter his web of sin BUT DON'T GO IN! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.245.46 (talk) 13:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But what about the golden words he's poured in my ear? Did they mean nothing?! Wereon (talk) 15:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wereon! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 709 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Flavia Bujor - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on James Monaghan (British politician). I do not think that James Monaghan (British politician) fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because Being a serving council is a claim of significance. It might or might not be considered notability at an AFD (note that notability can be cumulative, where several things no one of which is enough on its own add up to notability) but for speedy deletion the bar is much lower "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source". I request that you consider not re-tagging James Monaghan (British politician) for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk) 16:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned on its Talk page, but I'm not sure if you saw it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2005UKElectionNominalMap.svg is incorrect for four constituencies: 'As mentioned on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituencies_in_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election "Four constituency boundaries were then slightly altered in March 2009 by The Parliamentary Constituencies (England) (Amendment) Order 2009 (S.I. 2009 No. 698).' - the map does not include those changes, which are visually noticeable, especially Wells/Somerton and Frome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dracos (talk • contribs) 09:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, really? Thanks for letting me know, I'll change the maps shortly. Wereon (talk) 11:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Wereon (talk) 16:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wereon, I have corrected the OS grid reference in the Trafalgar Square infobox and checked it using Geohack [11] and Ordnance Survey 'Get-A-Map'. Previously, the 10-figure grid ref pointed to a point 200 metres up St Martins Lane: now it points to Trafalgar Square. Best wishes, Andy F (talk) 08:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Mark Wright (politician), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Wright (politician). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.