Loading AI tools
I'm sorry to bother you again, but would you mind taking another quick look at the Didsbury article? I thought it was coming along really quite nicely, but another editor seems to be claiming on my talk page that you would disapprove of its current layout. --Malleus Fatuarum 22:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a quick look at the article. I didn't think that I was wrecking it, but I thought it best to ask for a second opinion. Thanks also for your kind comments. To be honest, I'm a little bit embarrassed at the unexpected words of support; I still feel very much like a newbie, learning new things every day, and I really haven't done that much compared with editors like yourself and so many others. --Malleus Fatuarum 19:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello James. I hope all is well with you. I've had to go through and revert edits to upwards of 27 articles just now - all of articles that are Warrington-related. The edits all seem to remove Cheshire-templates from the articles, along with removing references to Cheshire in the categories the articles have. Additionally, there are a swathe of edits on other articles that may need reverting, but I don't have the energy to do this right now. The user who has done this can be seen if you look at the obvious reversions in my contributions history just before I posted this message to you. Now, the edits seem to be reminiscent of a historic-counties activist, and I wondered if you had come across this user in the past doing similar things or pushing an historic counties line at all? If you have the time (and I accept that you may not), would it be possible to take a look and let me know? Best wishes, David. DDStretch (talk) 23:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hello again, James. Thanks for the reply. He's re-imposed one change (anonymously, as can be discerned by looking at the editing histories of Culcheth and Glazebury and User talk:DShamen), and then posted a messge in which he accused some of us of being "rather touchy people". Well, it certainly seemed that a person of his editing experience ought to have realised that removing useful template information, in addition to his category work, was not a good idea on so many articles without any attempt at prior discussion given the number of them. So, I've given a slightly more robust response on his talk page. On other matters, I, too, have not been as active on here for a while - family issues (illness of my son, brother-in-law cancer scare, etc), and other matters have meant I haven't been able to devote as much time to editing things. I have, however, written some stuff on Hundreds of Cheshire and corrected the Cheshire entry on Historic counties of England (though the map they use remains in error), and List of hundreds of England and Wales. This has meant I've had to correct things on History of Lancashire, and History of Cheshire, which I am slowly getherig info to expand. I'm about to edit Diocese of Chester to give a more accurate description of its history, and then plan to write Ancient Parishes of Cheshire. Once those are in place, I can devote much more time to expanding History of Cheshire to more than its current puny state. I did know about the Warrington records for family histories/genealogy purposes, as I intermittently try to find out more about my father's family histories (we have a rather locally-bound surname to north Cheshire, though I was born in Crewe). I've also been wondering what we may have to do if the proposed new unitary authorities get created (new templates, new articles, though stubs are already in place), and what to do with the old ones - in this last case, I think it would be an idea to link them together with an article or articles about past administrative structures within Cheshire, of which the hundreds are another component. In this respect, something like Administrative History of Cheshire might be a worthwhile article, as it would be one major article to link in with History of Cheshire and the other historical articles I've already mentioned. Anyway, those are my current thoughts. Glad to hear from you as well. I hope things are going well. DDStretch (talk) 14:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
No, youv'e not upset me at all - just a question. On the 2nd October I think you changed a reference on the "Kersal Moor" page from Site of Biological Importance to Site of Biological Interest. That's if I understand how to read the edits history properly - I'm still trying to get to grips with all this stuff. Anyway, as far as I can tell an SSSI is a statutory designation and SBI is non- statutory one. I'd used SBI in another article on "Prestwich" and decided to put up a page on "Site of Biological Importance" as an explanation. Once I'd done that I went to the Kersal Moor page, thought I must have mistyped it and changed it back. Then I realised it had been edited by someone else. Have I got it right about the two designations? You can check my sources on the Site of Biological Importance Page Richerman 23:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I replied on my talk page, to avoid fragmenting the discussion. --Malleus Fatuarum 01:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome message, although currently working in the States, I hope I can use some of my 50+ years in the Manchester area to contribute. Take care Phil aka Geotek 16:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Your nomination to to delete both the band and the individual members was well founded, and I was pleased to see that it partially succeeded. Wikipedia is NOT a directory of anyone who has ever sung at a karaoke night at Wren's Nest. You know more about Wikipedia than I do, so maybe you can answer me this: You nominated Chloe Alper for deletion; her page is obviously self penned as ther is information in there that only she could know. Read it (I'm sure you have) and I hope you agree. My question is this: How can Chloe Alper claim any notability by reason of her association with the band 'Period Pains' when said band does not have an entry in Wikipedia. It is as if her entry was the entry for the band. She claims notability also by association with 'Pure Reason Revolution' but, granted, they have an entry in Wikipedia. To extend the reasoning, could I have an entry in Wikipedia because I once met somebody too insignificant to merit an entry on the grounds of notability? I think not. As I mentioneJustpassinby 23:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)d, I believe your arguments for deletion were well founded. I can and will address the objections raised to your proposals (unfortunately I ran out of time). If you wish to re-nominate for deletion then I will support your nomination
I do agree with that course of action. I have a problem with these entries (plus the one titled "The Dark Third" )which are not 'encyclopedic', but simply a 'promotional/Justpassinby 09:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)directory' entry. I don't know why they can't go into a more relevant Wiki
I got UK number plate codes to transcribe from this page British car number plates. Bobbacon 18:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jza84, I've not been around for a good while, I've been very busy over the last 6 months or so but I should now be able to start giving some time to Wiki. I'd be more than happy to rejoin the Gtr Manchester Project and hope to get started on the Wigan articles asap. Glad to see your still around !, hope to work with you in the future Man2 09:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I was just thinking that maybe it would be great if you could maybe make a map with just the borough of Manchester on it? As the article is supposed to be about the borough I think it would be great if we had a map in the geography section with the city marked on it and the airport and all the other major towns in the borough. Also with the adjacent boroughs marked on it. I would try doing it myself but I have no idea where to start even though I have some software. Do you think you would be able to try and put something together sometime? I think it would be a great addition to the article. Thanks └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 18:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes that map on Oldham is exactly the sort I was thinking of. Althought when it is shrunk down on the page it looks a little distorted, maybe that is because it is a jpeg? └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 21:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Go for the map! I agree we will need to expand the geography section a bit and it shouldn't be too hard. We can add a bit about the history of the city boundries and information about the surrounding boroughs and how Manchester is seen as the regional centre for GMR, North West and even the North. └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 21:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- I do live in Rochdale borough, not by choice. I don't know much about it in either history or geography terms, I know it is a bit of a dump though but that isn't very relevant. I guess I know a bit about the transport of Rochdale as I use it quite often to get out of here. I know they are supposed to be totally redeveloping the town centre soon but knowing Rochdale it is likely to take some time. I am willing to help with it though. └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 13:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have just thrown together a little bit of extra stuff onto the geography section. I know it is not very well worded yet but have a look here and tell me what is wrong/right with it, thanks! It is only a bit at the end of the geography section and hopefully there is more to come. └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 18:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Pradraig has gotten me confused. He claimes the straw poll is invalid, yet argues it shouldn't be closed after 4-days. If he views the poll as invalid, why should he care when it closes? GoodDay 19:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed, a compromise seems the only way. GoodDay 20:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Here's something for you the status of flags in the UK:
The English, Scottish and Welsh flags are recognised as National Flags by the British government, which some editors on WP claim isn't the case.--Padraig 15:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- The only way forward is that they accept that the Ulster Banner dosen't represent Northern Ireland today, and outside the contexts I put forward in the compromise solution its use breaches WP:V. They would be better off editing to improve Wikipedia then continue to edit war over this issue, I know I will be glad when this is put to rest.--Padraig 15:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- The use of the map image came about because when the Ulster Banner was removed from some templates, they argued that Northern Ireland couldn't left without a image when the England, Scotland and Wales entries had one, so someone added the map image to balance them out. When this is over I plan to remove the map images, as Flagcruft.--Padraig 16:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Did you get a chance to have a look at the Lundy map? --MichaelMaggs 20:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Looks very good to me. Thanks very much. --MichaelMaggs 05:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jza84. Thanks for drawing my attention to the guidelines. What exactly are the changes you propose? Chrisieboy 22:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for the kind words about my Sheffield map--yes, it was drawn in Adobe Illustrator. The railways are just paths with a 2 pt dashed stroke (2 pt dashes) and RGB of 63,63,63. I lightened the stroke colour to 102,102,102 to indicate tunnels (not really obvious at the size that it is rendered). —Jeremy (talk) 04:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I had seen this a little while back. I don't have, at the moment, the time I think the article needs so it's a little project on the backburner for now but thanks for the heads-up anyway. Regards, SeveroTC 11:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jza84, I've had a look at the guidelines and articles you mentioned and had a little think about the Blyth article's structure. I've come up with the following:
- History
- Governance and demography
- Geography
- Climate
- Transport links
- Economy
- Industry and commerce
- Employment
- Education
- Entertainment and leisure
- Events, venues and nightlife
- Sport and recreation
- Parks and open spaces
- Landmarks and places of interest
I'd very much prefer to leave Governance and demography as one section as the two subjects are combined within the text and they'd just end up as two very short sections anyway. I also think the Landmarks section should stay at the bottom as I feel it lacks the importance that similar sections in big-city articles might have. To be honest, although I don't feel as strongly about it, i'm not entirely enthusiastic about moving the Economy section as I feel that the subject is of particular importance to the town and the subject of regeneration follows on nicely from the rather gloomy end of the History section. Anyway, if you could let me know what you think, that would be great, cheers. Dbam Talk/Contributions 20:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, forget all that—i've just seen your comments at the FAC page. I saw your message on my talk page but didn't think to check my watchlist before replying. I'll still see what I can do, though. Cheers. Dbam Talk/Contributions 20:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Just seen the new map, looks great! Dbam Talk/Contributions 21:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jza84. Just when we thought constituent countries was settled? GoodDay 23:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps they've forgotten the name of the article, United Kingdom. Sure hope this isn't a continuation of 'British VS Irish'; anyways I'll keep my cool. GoodDay 23:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Not at the moment, although I'm sure a lightbulb is destined any time soon... Rudget Contributions 14:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Jza84- my position is that editors should be allowed to show the image being discussed. No one has ever said that the flag is the official flag, and have pointed to sources such as Britannica and World Flags Database which state it is unofficial flag. Do you really think the position in List of British flags where the Union Flag is shown alongside a description of the Northern Ireland flag is appropiate?
I can't really see how to take the mediation forward given Padraig's refusal to compromise on any issue. Astrotrain 16:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'll add in a suggestion for List of British flags. I hope that by looking at specific articles, we can avoid this constant repetition over sources. Have a look at let me know what you think. Astrotrain 20:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Astrotrain Imade it very clear I was not going to discuss each article and template individually, you then added a new section to discuss an template before the previous discussion was agreed, so I removed it.--Padraig 21:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to say thanks. --John Maynard Friedman 16:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I did mean one for greeting new members and I have already seen the invitation message. A border around it would be great though! Also as you requested here is the assessment grid. It took a while to implement but after that the bot does all the work! └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 14:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
| Greater Manchester articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
 FA |
8 | 10 | 10 | 19 | 47 | ||
| FL |
1 | 3 | 14 | 18 | |||
 GA |
6 | 14 | 29 | 41 | 1 | 91 | |
| B | 16 | 34 | 55 | 108 | 6 | 219 | |
| C | 24 | 47 | 151 | 374 | 54 | 650 | |
| Start | 94 | 346 | 1,753 | 203 | 2,396 | ||
| Stub | 15 | 89 | 1,256 | 125 | 1,485 | ||
| List | 2 | 5 | 40 | 169 | 17 | 233 | |
| Category | 1 | 1,218 | 1,219 | ||||
| Disambig | 12 | 12 | |||||
| File | 30 | 30 | |||||
| Portal | 2 | 2 | |||||
| Project | 5 | 5 | |||||
| Template | 73 | 73 | |||||
| NA | 1 | 1 | 6 | 26 | 73 | 107 | |
| Other | 3 | 3 | |||||
| Assessed | 57 | 221 | 730 | 3,760 | 1,416 | 406 | 6,590 |
| Unassessed | 2 | 1 | 91 | 94 | |||
| Total | 57 | 221 | 730 | 3,762 | 1,417 | 497 | 6,684 |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 24,329 | Ω = 4.98 | |||||
Dearest Supporter,
Hi thanks for your welcome Logisticalwizard 11:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I'll go more slowly. Thanks for alerting me Logisticalwizard 11:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes that is exactly the welcome message I wanted! I changed to colour scheme to red and yellow in line with the rest of the project, hope you don't mind! └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 17:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes that's exactly the sort of thing, although I'd prefer a bit more text. Maybe I should work on a longer welcome message myself. If you're going to complain you have to be prepared to do the work to put things right. The logo's really good. I hope you've caught up on your sleep now. Just one other question - is there a way to search just the help pages? I don't find the help contents has very much in it. Richerman 14:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
| File:Interlingual Barnstar.png | The Geography Barnstar | |
| For the immense amount of work that you've done in creating maps, and for your on-going work with the Greater Manchester project, I thought that you deserved this. I was only surprised that nobody had already awarded it to you. Malleus Fatuarum 19:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC) |
Fantastic map and brilliant writing! I just had to move it all straight to the Manchester article to let people see the great work. Thanks very much for being so prompt with the map, I know you have a lot of requests! └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 03:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if you could give me an idea of how you create those excellent maps.I want to do the same. I'm in IT, and have used several GIS packages, but can't suss out how the maps are made. Can you give me an idea or direction? scope_creep 17:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Could you tell me what the convention is for stating the distances to settlements? I put in the one from Kersal to Manchester measured from St. Anne's Church as it was always the distance used on milestones and old maps - and gave up on Salford as there is no real centre. I see you changed it to "the centre of" Manchester and added Salford - which I suspected was probably the right way to do it but didn't know where they were. Is the centre just a notional point you guess at from the map? Also what did you think of the text I proposed for the welcome template? It seem to have been met with a crashing silence so far, except from and-rew. Richerman 11:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Well, yes and no! The Genuki gazeteer sounds very useful but I'm still not sure where the centre of Manchester or Salford are. Is it Piccadilly for Manchester? and Salford doesn't seem to have one at all - where did you take them from - or did you just use genuki? And yes, please put the text on if you're happy with it. Richerman 11:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
{{helpme}}
I've uploaded an image at Wikicommons here, but there is one with an identical name on this English Wikipedia, here. I want to display the commons version, but the en.wikipedia seems to get priority, I and can't work out how to rename one or the other of these images to get around this. Can anybody help? -- Jza84 · (talk) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, the software doesn't have features to either include the Commons image or to rename an image. At present, the only thing you can do is to reupload the Commons image with a slightly different name (maybe mentioning on the image description page that it's a duplicate uploaded so that it would be includable from the English Wikipedia). Hope that helps! --ais523 11:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jza84, there's a request (again) to add on the British monarchs. Plus, the old argument of British monarchs beginning at 1603 instead of 1707 has begun (again). GoodDay 19:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry to bug you again Jza84, but I might be having trouble with Tharky. I'm not British, but I know (despite Tharky's Royal family source) that George I to Elizabeth II don't belong on the English list. Also, James I to William III are not British monarchs. GoodDay 00:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
As you're the only editor to this, and it's not used anywhere as of yet, you can simply place the ((db-g7}} on it, as G7 covers all namespaces. I've placed it there for you - hope you don't mind. SkierRMH 20:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- p.s. I just nav'd over to your user page and saw that we're both of the same Clan Cameron! Aonaibh ri chéile SkierRMH 20:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- At your request, I deleted it and put it 6 feet under. I also happen to be one of the main editors over at {{Infobox Settlement}}. I am available if you have any questions concerning the use of Infobox Settlement with English districts.—MJCdetroit 02:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Just wondering, do you use MSN? If you do it would be great if I could add you as we do correspond quite often on here and I am sure it will be much quicker with IM! If you do have MSN please send me an email using if not then no worries! └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 01:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I don't make a habit of peer reviewing - I just take request, in this case from And-Rew. In any case, I'll take note of that standard. Cheers, — H2O — 23:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Rudget Contributions 17:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Hiya
Just to let you know that I have (I think) addressed all the points you raised at the Brownhills FAC, although I'm not 100% sure about the "built environment" stuff - I read the built environment article and, to be honest, I couldn't really follow it :-P ChrisTheDude 22:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I've added in a bit about the housing mix in the town (47% semis, apparently) and will see if I can find any further details worth adding in..... ChrisTheDude 09:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi there, just wondering if you might have a chance to add your support to the Brownhills FAC soon....? Currently it's stalled a bit, with only one editor having expressed a firm support/oppose opinion...... ChrisTheDude 07:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your support! ChrisTheDude 15:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi there, just wondering if you might have a chance to add your support to the Brownhills FAC soon....? Currently it's stalled a bit, with only one editor having expressed a firm support/oppose opinion...... ChrisTheDude 07:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know, I am working on the comment you made regarding the built environment, etc. of Blyth. Unfortunately, i'm going to be away next week, so i'll be unable to continue with it until I get back. Dbam Talk/Contributions 11:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I see the article has been promoted now. Thanks for your comments, I will try to get that last one sorted. Dbam Talk/Contributions 19:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
In the spirit of another editor's question a few days back, I'd also like to know how you go about creating maps for English counties. To preemptively answer your first question, yes, I do have experience with vector-based graphics programs (mostly Inkscape, but I have used Illustrator in the past). – Swid (talk · edits) 03:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Are you intending to produce maps for English counties, or maps of other places in this style?.... It's quite a difficult process to explain - I'm not a proffessional cartographer, I just developed the style in frustration to lack of progress by other editors! You will need source material of the county you intend to make - Sometimes you're lucky to find stuff on Google, then official county/district/borough council material, or stuff from the Boundary Commission for England.
- I'm not sure if there is a particular element that you're confused or interested about, so I'll give a breif description and you can then raise specifics, such as specific pantones etc..... The maps I make are simple in terms of construction; they use no special tricks or advanced editing. They are built in layers, ususally with the pencil tool. I create a layer for county boundaries (in pure black pencil - usually stroke 4 - 7), another for district boundaries, another for motorways (which are two identical layers upon each other - one in thick blue, the other in thin white), another for urban areas (which is any form of human structure). These are all "traced" from, and matched up to source material.
- Once this is done, I usually finish them in Adobe Photoshop, so I use the eraser tool at 29% for all areas outside of the county, and using the free to use maps already on wikipedia, append a national map at the most appropriate corner of the image. That's a whirlwind explanation, does this help at all? -- Jza84 · (talk) 12:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I'd like to help out with creating maps for some of the remaining English counties. (I had been planning on making maps for municipalities here in Nebraska, but a bot beat me to that task a couple weeks ago.)
- I was hoping there was a bit more automation to that process or a centralized source of the map data lying around somewhere, but I'm not surprised to see that it's largely a "brute force" task. That being said, I do have some follow-up questions:
- Is the base layer used for the counties simply an enlarged section of a UK outline map?
- Where do you manage to track down the data for urban areas? Do they have an explicit Census definition, or are they derived from topo maps or satellite imagery, or something else entirely?
- What are the Pantones used?
- I was hoping there was a bit more automation to that process or a centralized source of the map data lying around somewhere, but I'm not surprised to see that it's largely a "brute force" task. That being said, I do have some follow-up questions:
- OK, I think I can answer these (just about! - it's complicated!), but by base layer, do you mean the black line of the county boundary? I wasn't sure.
- I have to be very careful about sharing tips on source material I'm afraid. On sources all I can say is that in the UK, official cartography is monopolised by the Ordnance Survey; in this capacity all of their material is copyright and exact copies are illegal. Examples of their excellent work however is normally found at www.statistics.gov.uk, (or try searching "County name" and "statistics", like "Cheshire statistics" at Google), should you be interested. Simillarly, GoogleMaps have excellent resources on what is an urban area and what isn't, but their work is also copyright. However, the urban areas from GoogleMaps and most other atlases are identical, and are escentially any kind of human settlement or development, and thus available from both topo and satellite material.
- Matching everything up from multiple sources is the real trick with these. For example, you may have an excellent source for county boundaries, and another for urban areas, but there is no apparent way of easily matching the scale. I tend to work off coastlines and/or rivers and/or motorways however, sometimes from a third or fourth source where necessary.
- On pantones, I'm not sure what format is best for you, but you may or may not be aware that they are selectable from the "eyedropper" tool if you open one of my existing maps in your image software?? I can provide them if you want though, I'm not being lazy! I understand it's hard to get instructions in this way, and thus I've no problem if you still have queries at this stage.... I do intend to aid in the completion of all county maps of England sometime soon though. Oh, and on another note, the county system to be used is that of the Ceremonial counties of England per convention. -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Arms-rochdale-mbc.png. 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 09:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Arms-salford-city.png. 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 09:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't be able to get you into the room where these archives are stored, I'm only there at the generosity of a friend, so to take 'strangers' along with me would be really cheeky. However, I live near Urmston, so once I've found the volume you want meeting up somewhere should be fairly easy. I'm not after money for it, just a coffee would do nicely :) Please note they're too big for a scanner (I've added pics to my Flickr page), so you'd have to photograph them to upload any images to Wiki. Parrot of Doom 13:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I had a look at the Salford article earlier today, and as it looked a bit unloved and forlorn I took pity on it. At least to the extent of doing enough to be able in good faith to take the cleanup tags off it anyway. But it's obviously miles behind the Manchester article. I was wondering though, is there any reason why it ought not to use the same settlement infobox as the Manchester article does? Currently it's using the UK place infobox, but that doesn't seem grand enough for a city. :)
I'm intending to see what I can do with at least some of those Salford articles, particularly the ones that mesh with my ongoing projects to get Trafford Park and Chat Moss up to GA.
BTW, your Oldham article is looking very good now. It'll soon surely be ready for GA/FA? I think in your place I'd go straight for an FA nomination with it. --Malleus Fatuarum 18:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm never quite sure of the convention, but I've replied to your reply on my talk page. :) --Malleus Fatuarum 23:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad to see you've bitten the bullet and made the FA nomination, and I'll be doing all I can to help until it gets that star. Could I perhaps ask one small favour of you though? Instead of saying that "there is little to be gained" by a GA nomination could you perhaps make it clear that you're being specific to this Oldham article? "There's little to be gained in this case ...", for instance. There's lots to be gained in other cases. I've got quite a soft spot for the GA process, and I do think that it's useful. --Malleus Fatuarum 00:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar.— Rod talk 17:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I've done quite a bit of work on the Chat Moss article over the last few months, and I thought it might now be up to GA, so I nominated it yesterday. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to take a quick look at it and let me know what you think?
I'm optimistic that it will be our first GA for a landform in Greater Manchester, and perhaps even an FA in time. --Malleus Fatuarum 21:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for returning the copyediting favour, much appreciated. It's really hard to see the faults in my own "perfect" prose, much easier to see the faults in others. --Malleus Fatuarum 22:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I've added some in-line citations to the tithe maps article. If you can, please take a look and let me know if more are needed. Rjm at sleepers 20:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
This whole Inverness affair is really beyond ridiculous. I've recently been accused of holding some Scottish Wikipedians in contempt - is it really any wonder? --Breadandcheese 01:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your help with the Redbridge, Hampshire (now back where it belongs!) article, much appreciated. Waggers 16:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your note - I don't have time for a full response; just to say that I put this matter to WikiProject UK geography (see the discussion here. I don't agree with the conventions for reasons I'll explain nest week when I return from a short break. --Daemonic Kangaroo 16:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, "skriking" certainly means "crying" locally. I have some memory of an article that refers to the local dialect containing Danish words, but I can't immediately locate it. I'll keep thinking. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 10:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Nice work! And, I'm pleased to say, quick to calibrate, too! Warofdreams talk 02:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! I wasn't sure of putting it in some articles, but you've gone one further.
 |
The WikiProject Greater Manchester Award of Merit | |
| I, Rudget, award Jza84 the Greater Manchester Award of Merit for above board and oustanding contributions to Greater Manchester, and the greater area of the UK in general. Well done! Rudget.talk 13:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC) |
- That's quite alright. Rudget.talk 13:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Well done on this! Regan123 (talk) 19:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, very well done!! └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 20:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Very well done. Backs up the awarding of barnstar! :) Rudget.talk 21:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations on getting this article to FA status. Sorry I've not been my usual helpful self on this topic. Just a lot of things going on which I won't bore you with. Usually when I do get chance to play with Wikipedia I have nothing to contribute to local articles and end up getting on with something else. Sorry about that. Hope you're well, and well done again. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 11:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Who are you, and why do you feel this page needs to be rewritten?
Actually, it was a problem with Paignton, the co-ordinates for which pointed to the sea. I've correct it. Nice work, again, don't wear yourself out!
In terms of requests, would it be possible to have a locator insert for the Edinburgh map, showing its location within Scotland or the UK? Also, for the Devon map, was Lundy just off the western edge, or might it squeeze on? Warofdreams talk 01:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Great, thanks for the response. There is definitely an argument for the inset locator map for the Scottish council area maps showing Scotland rather than the UK, as those in the central belt are small and it will be difficult to see them on a UK map. What do you think?
- The headline today: all three maps are now calibrated and have been implemented. England is now on the home straight; there is, however, a lot of Scotland to do, and as for Wales... Warofdreams talk 01:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Excellent, another one done. With only nine remaining, you could possibly finish England inside a fortnight! Warofdreams talk 01:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- And that's Wiltshire done, too. So far as I'm concerned, if you're planning on keeping anything like this rate up, the order doesn't really matter, so take your pick. I've got a plan for Stockton, but it would mean a major overhaul of the workings of the template, and I'll need to test it when I have a fair bit of time. By the way, thanks for fixing the West Sussex link. Warofdreams talk 03:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Seven to fourteen days sounds great! I'm on holiday for two weeks from Saturday, but for the first week I will have some internet access and may be able to construct some more templates - so if it's closer to seven, I might be able to help - if it's longer, I'm afraid I'll have to wait until I get back. Warofdreams talk 03:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- OK, that's Oxfordshire done. It's slow work, as I'm on a dial-up connection, and next week, I'll be abroad and unlikely to have any internet access. Warofdreams talk 00:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
|
The WikiProject Greater Manchester Award of Merit | |
| For virtually single-handedly getting Oldham to FA status. |
---- WebHamster 01:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi again; I've now joined WP:UKGEO. I had been meaning to for a few weeks, but never got round to it! I see we now have quite a few more UK place articles at Featured Article status (including your Oldham nomination, I'm pleased to see!), so once I have finished the Peterborough spoken article I will try to narrate some more. Picking up on a point made by somebody at the Spoken Wikipedia talk page the other day, I wonder if it would be useful to have, on as many UK place articles as possible, a pronunciation link (using Template:Audio or similar syntax) demonstrating how the name is pronounced in British English? This would probably be most useful for our major cities and for places where the spelling is misleading, such as Happisburgh. It wouldn't take long to make, upload and link the sound files, and could prove to be a useful enhancement particularly for non-British users. I remember seeing several Dutch town and province articles with embedded pronunciation links (e.g. Overijssel), and thinking how useful this was. Let me know what you think.
Crawley, on which I was heavily involved in the recent rewrite, passed WP:GA a couple of months ago and has been stable since then. I have never submitted anything to peer review or Featured Article status before; in your view, on a quick look, does it seem ready for one of these? It would be great to see it as a Featured Article!
Cheers, Hassocks5489 (talk) 13:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- There is a category on the Wikimedia Commons for "British English pronunciations", where sound clips of British-accented spoken words or short clips are stored (and then linked to their respective articles in Wikipedia, Wiktionary or wherever). Files have to be saved in the format (e.g.) En-uk-London.ogg, according to the naming convention shown here. In terms of embedding the audio in an article, neither the Wiki markup in the edit window nor the on-screen result look much different from "normal":
- Enschede or Eanske in the local dialect (Twents) is a municipality and a city...
- or Eanske in the local dialect (Twents) is a municipality and a city...
- (I did it with Enschede because somebody has already uploaded and linked it :))
- It all seems to work quite neatly and appears straightforward — I didn't know any of the above before today! Anyway, I need to create a Commons account first (which I have been meaning to do anyway); then I suppose it might be an idea to record a few test examples to see how it goes. If it seems to work, it may be an idea to put a note on the project home page about it — perhaps encouraging contributions (some of those Welsh names are quite difficult for a non-native speaker like me to attempt!), requests etc. Overall, although the ideal would be to have a full spoken version of each UK place article, having at least the name pronounced would be a good start. Hassocks5489 (talk) 22:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing the West Sussex map by the way! It's amazing how rural we really are. Anyway, I have made a start on the pronunciations as discussed above; please see this sandbox subpage on my userpage (disregard the misleading title and the bit about Avantix Mobile machines!). This is what London, Altrincham, Urmston, Hampshire and Somerset's first paragraphs would look like if they included the sound file. I'll put something on the WP:UKGEO page and/or talk page about the proposal; edit the relevant articles to include the sound clips; write a "how to..." for the project page, ideally to include an area where all clips can be listed by category (settlements, counties, rivers etc.); and then really get things underway by recording some more. Judging by the time taken to do everything necessary (recording, editing, uploading, adding to article text and copying to sandbox) for those five, this is a project on which real progress could be made in the short/medium-term. When each clip is only 1-2 seconds long, it wouldn't take long to get plenty produced. Anyway, enough gassing - have a look here and let me know. Hassocks5489 (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- PS I've started a spoken version of Oldham today as well. Hassocks5489 (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the info - the "discussion" I tried to generate elsewhere has rather ground to a halt. If I have a spare hour or two one day, and the inclination to take it up again, I may do, but it's not high on my list of priorities at the moment. Regards, BencherliteTalk 21:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I have tinkered with the article as much as I think I can now and a test page is at User:Rjgibb/Sandbox. I read the suggested example articles and lifted a couple of tricks but was wary of putting too many tables and so forth in (e.g for population) where it would throw out the formatting alongside the extant images. Query also whether the smaller community sections look right and how best to get the Religion section to work with the images - both of which I think are needed. Any further suggestions appreciated. Cheers Dick G (talk) 02:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Response on my Talk page. Thanks Dick G (talk) 21:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Further resp on my Talk page. Thanks once again Dick G (talk) 06:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, appreciate you're on a break but if and when you log back in, please could you take a look at Wormshill (as rewritten) and consider taking it out of GA hold. Cheers Dick G (talk) 05:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping and welcome back. Yours in giddy anticipation, Dick G (talk) 03:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Great! Thanks for completing the review, am quite chuffed! Am slightly disappointed that an editor thought fit to delete one of the images but I hope to be able to restore it as IMHO it falls within accepted fair use criteria. Thanks once again Dick G 21:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping and welcome back. Yours in giddy anticipation, Dick G (talk) 03:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, appreciate you're on a break but if and when you log back in, please could you take a look at Wormshill (as rewritten) and consider taking it out of GA hold. Cheers Dick G (talk) 05:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Further resp on my Talk page. Thanks once again Dick G (talk) 06:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I am registered and you can find me as LeeFallon. I'll try and send you a personal message, regards... Leefallon (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.22.208 (talk) 23:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I hope this is the right arena for a chat.
Thanks for your reply, and please do not feel that I find your comments in any way antagonistic. I, like you, understand the aims of the Wikipedia project - and also respect the formal guidelines of the site. I shall read the pages you have recommended with interest, and where possible modify my input accordingly. This entry is, of course, a work in progress and I intend to add much more in the future. I'm sure that as time allows it will be knocked into a recognisable Wikipedia shape. In the meantime please understand that this will be of great interest to anybody interested in Belthorn despite it's Wikipedia shortfalls. I've now offered up the basic framework for this entry, and intend to tweak it over the next couple of weeks.
Thanks for your interest and input.
Lee —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leefallon (talk • contribs) 00:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Look, let's be civil about this and argue it properly. I really hate animosity between editors: we're both trying to improve the article at the end of the day.
It is not right to say that the non-metropolitan county of Durham is a crop of the adminsitrative county no more as to say that the metropolitan county of Tyne and Wear is a crop of the adminsitrative counties of Durham and Northumberland. You can't give a history of the adminsitrative county (and before) and put it in the non-met Durham article and not the Tyne and Wear article as part of Tyne and Wear was part of the administrative county of Durham. This is denying Tyne and Wear its County Durham history: as if it was somehow "cut off" from "County Durham", which "lived on" in the non-metropolitan county of Durham. The non-metropolitan county does not have a monopoly over "County Durham".
I realise that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places) states that counties are a continuation, and that you are only following guidelines. However, they are wrong. I will therefore challenge them there on the talk page. You can revert the edits that I made until it is resolved there if you wish.Logoistic (talk) 00:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello James, Thanks for the messages about the UK counties guidelines. I'll take a look. I've been away attending a series of funerals, and other family matters recently, and so have been preoccupied with other things. Now that I've come back, I've been trying to sort out some problems with Chester (but seem to have inflamed matters between myself and newish editor.) Oh well. DDStretch (talk) 17:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Jza84, no problem - the userbox refers to an issue a while back when there was a real campaign (or at least the feeling that there was) to remove images of the Ulster Banner from Wikipedia with apparantly little consideration for context. --sony-youthpléigh 11:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the invitation to comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about counties. Apologies for the delay in replying, which has been due to a christening, a holiday and a funeral (in that order) coinciding with a change in broadband provider. The wrinkles in the last are not yet quite sorted but when I have the opportunity I will have a look and if I have anything to offer, I will do so.
Incidentally thanks for your involvement in the Chester article which has been a thorn in the flesh of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cheshire. It would be good to get this article to an acceptable standard but so much to do....! Best wishes, Peter. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I know it's frustrating, but please try not to describe posts as trolling: it's not very helpful, even if it is trolling. --RFBailey (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
You asked me to let you know when/if I decided to put myself forwards as an administrator.
Well, I accepted a nomination last night, although to be perfectly honest I'm rather beginning to regret it now. Anyway, if you'd like to make some comment my RfA is at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Malleus_Fatuarum.
Great news about Manchester getting FA; the Belle Vue Zoo article is coming along nicely as well. It's really heartening to see so much activity in the project. You must feel very pleased with what you've achieved.
--Malleus Fatuarum (talk) 16:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I took the liberty of adding a wikibreak message to your userpage after you told me you wanted a break from Wikipedia via IM. I hope you don't feel offended, just wanted people to know you're not ignoring them. Hope you're back soon! └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 19:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh dear! I hope your hard drive can be recovered, it can often cost quite a bit. I hope you noticed Manchester has a lovely little star at the top now! Hope to see you on MSN or something soon and good luck getting all your data back. └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 02:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Can You please adopt me?
I've had a rough start to wikipedia, I just finished a block, but that was not because I was trying to be deliberately disruptive, but because i wanted to help and made a mistake
I am quite desperate,
Please adopt me
Thank-you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeseth1992 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
You kindly offered to adopt Joeseth1992. I don't know if you noticed, but he had just been released from a 3 day block for vandalism when he began to do it again. He now has a week block. I don't think he really wants to learn how to be a good editor, as a quick check of his contributions will bear out. Cheers, Jeffpw 15:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- A little background, though it is rather dull: My adoptee contacted him right after ebing adopted, and suggested he contact me and offer to adopt me. He did so, to be silly. When I told him to knock it off, he left me a vandal warning, then did the same to 6 people, including (by an unlucky coincidence) 2 admins. hence the first block. After being unblocked, he asked about 8 people to adopt him, then added a vaguely obscene limerick to another user's page.
- My adoptee right now was also blocked in the beginning, and is now making great progress, so if this guy can be rehabilitated, fantastic. Miracles happen. Just wanted to fill you in. Happy editing! Jeffpw 15:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- no no thats not what i meant when i spoke to him! i meant for him to ask you (User:Jeffpw), if you would adopt him... why would i say it the other way round? hes like completely new! O_o Iamandrewrice 16:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the update, and yes a break has been good. Let's see what we can do with County Durham. Have a look, do you feel anything else needs either a copyedit or citations? MRSC • Talk 21:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
