User talk:Enginear

The article Zoe (talking and emoting head) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, single reference is sourced from project itself

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 06:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Text of article follows, copied for my own interest in case of deletion:

"Zoe" is an innovative talking and emoting head produced by a collaboration between researchers at the University of Cambridge Department of Engineering and the Toshiba's Cambridge research laboratory.

The digital, two-dimensional head is programmed to talk words typed in, with both visual and audio effects determined by any combination of six different primary emotions. The corpus used was video recordings created of Zoë Lister saying about 7,000 sentences in six different emotions - Happy, Sad, Tender, Angry, Afraid and Neutral. The prototype's user interface not only allows different proportions of these emotions to be mixed, for example, very sad, fairly angry and a little afraid, but also allows alteration of the pitch, speed and depth of the voice itself.

On 19 March 2013, the research team reportedly said, "by combining these levels, it becomes possible to pre-set or create almost infinite emotional combinations. For instance, combining happiness with tenderness and slightly increasing the speed and depth of the voice makes it sound friendly and welcoming. A combination of speed, anger and fear makes Zoe sound as if she is panicking." They say this "allows for a level of emotional subtlety which has not been possible in other avatars like Zoe until now."

The coding has been kept compact enough to fit in the memory of a smartphone, and the team are said to be working on a system that would allow people to upload their own faces and voices in a few seconds, enabling them to "customise and personalise their own, emotionally realistic, digital assistants".

They are exploring other possible applications, working, already, with a school for autistic and deaf children, where the technology could be used to help pupils to “read” emotions and lip-read. In a trial, volunteers obtained via a crowd-sourcing website, successfully recognised the emotion in 77% of cases, even though other cues, for example hand gestures, were missing.^[1]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tunnel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aquaduct (check to confirm | 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 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, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Done, and spelling corrected. Enginear (talk) 18:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I've actually made over 60,000 edits over the years, for what it's worth. Instinct from experience shouldn't really count for much here, but I'd expect articles about works of fiction to refer to characters in the same way that the works themselves did. A surnames-only policy would look odd applied to subjects where a character's surname was barely used in the work itself - we don't refer to the protagonist as "Pirrip" throughout the Great Expectations article.

It seems like an oversight that the manual of style doesn't seem to address this (I can only find a couple of series-specific British television WikiProjects saying "Names should be used in a context suitable to their role in the episode", with protagonists and neutral characters being referred to by forenames or nicknames, and antagonists and officials by their surnames). Perhaps it's worth raising the subject at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction? --McGeddon (talk) 14:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I've raised this myself at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Writing_about_fiction#Forenames_and_surnames_of_characters. Feel free to join in. --McGeddon (talk) 19:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ronan Point, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Building Regulations (check to confirm | 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 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, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Done Enginear (talk) 21:28, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beverley Brook, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Brook and Lea. 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) 08:58, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Corrected -- actually they were supposed to be links to Wiktionary, and I had left out the wikt: Enginear (talk) 09:11, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

cites ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}

I am writing this from memory, without checking facts, but I am fairly certain that

• There are no normal "no-go" areas for police in the UK, although there were a few small areas from which the police made a tactical withdrawal for a few hours during the 2011 riots, until reinforcements arrived.
• There are no areas in the UK where sharia law is tolerated for criminal matters, although for civil matters, if both parties agree to do so, then rather than going to court, they may use an arbitration service which might, if they wish, work according to any religious laws, eg Jewish, Muslim or even Christian, provided that the penalties do not involve any illegal act, eg wounding or bigamy
• In the UK, claimed religious or ethnic practices which are illegal in UK, eg female genital mutilation, honour killings, forced marriage, abusive relationships including abusive parenting, pedophilia, human trafficking, carrying kirpans (unless they are small and blunt) and even supplying marijuana are all prosecuted without any fear or favour (although until that was clarified recently, greater leeway was sometimes allowed)
• Discrimination on grounds of sex, sexuality, race, disability, etc is illegal in all public buildings/spaces and also at work and in education, even if it is claimed not to disadvantage anyone -- so, for example, enforcement of seating segregated by sex or marital status is illegal
• Veils are permitted to be banned where they affect safety or make work less effective, so schoolteachers and care workers may not cover their faces (possibly so deaf pupils can lip read, but I'm not certain of the reasoning)
• Within weeks of a tip-off that Muslim governors were pressurizing head teachers in what turned out to be only a handful of schools in Birmingham, the issues were rectified
• Within days of opening, a UK Muslim faith school which tried to segregate pupils by sex and teach only "halal" viewpoints was shut down
• Within days of hearing that Muslim men near the East London Mosque were verbally abusing women whom they felt were not appropriately covered, a few years back, the practice was stamped out by the police, who were backed by the Mosque leaders
• After years of a laissez faire attitude to those who preached jihad, or any other violence or intolerance, English law has been tightened about as far as it can be without outlawing many Jewish and Christian preachers too, and anecdotally, seems to be enforced.
• I cannot be so certain about conditions in France, but I would be surprised if they are significantly different, and all the other Western European countries are likely to be similar. I know much less about Eastern Europe, so can't comment.

If anyone is sure I'm wrong about any of these points, please say. (And my apologies if I take a long time to answer, as I'm going through a busy patch in the real world.) Enginear (talk) 06:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Manor of Copped Hall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epping (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:59, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Private_Eye&diff=910630164&oldid=910625791 Enginear (talk) 21:19, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Enginear. I notice you have recently made some useful edits to certain articles, mainly connected with the London Underground. These are all fine. However, I wonder if you realise that you don't need to quote the entire text of the edit within the edit summary, as you have done with your edits to Northern line and London Underground rolling stock, for example. No harm is done, but it does tend to clog up the history pages. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:04, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

@Yamla: Enginear (talk) 18:49, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 148.252.140.23. This is NOT a static IP address. My provider is Lebara Internet, which runs on the Vodaphone 4G/5G networks. My last Wikipedia edit was at 01:22, 26 December 2025, although I edited en.wikt (my primary focus) at 23:02, 13 January 2026 and I see I am not blocked there. My provider is Lebara Internet, which runs on the Vodaphone 4G/5G networks

Accept reason:

I have lifted the block. Be aware, the IP address range(s) you are operating from are the source of significant abuse and it is likely you'll occasionally hit such blocks. This particular block is lifted, though, so you should be good to go. Yamla (talk) 18:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I have noticed that the IP address is usually blocked on Wikipedia -- literally, I do not recall a time when there was not a block on it -- though it is never blocked on Wiktionary, so presumably there is someone who vandalises 'pedia but not Wikt. It's puzzling why they continue, when for 99% of the time, they can't edit -- perhaps they diarise the dates when the blocks are due to be lifted, and come back then. Lebara is a relatively cheap PAYG phone + data provider, so perhaps that attracts the type of person who wants to vandalise, as well as frugal people who don't, but for one reason or another, can't use a landline. I used to be with another cheap mobile data provider, and that was often blocked too.

But in the past, existing accounts have always been exempted from the blocks, and presumably that has been adequate to stop the vandalism, so I request that that policy continues. Enginear (talk) 14:04, 21 January 2026 (UTC)