User talk:Keith D/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Sheffield companies template

Hi, Keith could you cast your expert Wiki eye over this Template/ navbox I've been building for Sheffield companies to gather some of the firms together without falling foul of the wiki list arguments. Template Here Still trying to track down article for a load of the firms. So whats the view on red links in navboxes, as would indicate articles required (and hopefully get authors) or looks bad. Asked for comment earlier on Project Sheffield and got little response. I'm not 100% Happy with section splits so 2nd opinion would be appreciated.

Also wonder would one be an idea for all the little colliery articles, with little cross linking, so like some of the rail & bus articles are grouped and thus get a wider audience. ? Thanks - BulldozerD11 (talk) 20:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Cannot really comment on the section splits, will leave that one for your judgement. On red-links I would think that they are OK as I have seen plenty of templates with them in, though it does assume that they are all notable.

I would keep the colliery ones separate as the template is rather large as it stands, maybe you can compress it by shortening the longer section names or getting them to split onto 2 lines. The black bits look out of place and may be using a pipe would be better to make it all a link. Also I would remove the trailing bullet in each list.

Keith D (talk) 21:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Keith, Notability can always a issue for WP articles IMO as it depends on the editors locality or perspective and can be relative to the related articles. See what you mean on the black text as could confuses as in some templates the article link that the templates in is shown black. Will clean bullets up.

Probably was not too clear with about colliery template idea, was not meaning to add to those companies as a new section but just create one for the relavent articles. Could link to it, or make them as Nestable if find the code out from another example (do a bit of code recycling) - BulldozerD11 (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Revised it based on your comments, new version here; Sandbox3 see if you think ok to release. Have also done a small one for the power stations in Yorks & Humber here; Sandbox 4, for comment as well please. ---BulldozerD11 (talk) 16:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

That looks OK now apart from footer line, I would start them all with caps or lower case rather than a mixture. On the new one unsure about having an external link in the template. May be better to start a stub for it to link to.

By the way thanks for doing some tagging, you may be able to tell that I have not covered South Yorkshire as yet, still a few categories to go in West Yorkshire. Keith D (talk) 22:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Created template now, after fixing caps and started adding it to listed articles. Thanks, No problem with adding tags, doing Sheffield, Yorkshire, Derbyshire, + odd others like Companies (only big ones), Coal/energy. A lot of articles are in niche interest groups, and lack links or cats to wider groupings. Hopefully will lead to expansion and better refs adding. Trouble is going off at a tangent takes me miles from what i was looking for originally. --BulldozerD11 (talk) 00:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Fintan264 has taken the powerstation code from your sandbox and is applying it directly to articles rather than creating a template and applying the template to the articles. Keith D (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Missed that note above Keith but spotted the (non)templates and have replaced them all (I think), and cheers for sorting photo out on Thorpe Marsh.

Have started adding {{Sheffield companies}} to firms on the list now, so will probably turn up more articles for your attention like William Stones Ltd article with no lead section, in place of redirect to Coors---BulldozerD11 (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Password protected

Goole AFC Links

If you care to look at the forum, you will find it is no longer password protected, so stop jumping the gun and remove the warnings!

For the good of the club —Preceding unsigned comment added by For the good of the club (talk • contribs) 22:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

It looks like the site has changed this evening. May be you are connected to the site and there is a conflict of interest here. A forum site still fails our external links policy. I have issued a three revert warning on your user page as you have reverted more than 3 times in the last 24 hours. Please take the appropriate action to comply with this policy Keith D (talk) 22:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Power station categories

Sorry to jump in here with only one side of the conversation. I was wondering why we have some power stations in county categories and others in regional categories. I would have thought that we should go for one or the other and not a mixture of both. Keith D (talk) 22:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, its because I'm in the middle of changing them from county to region because there were too many categories using counties.Fintan264 (talk) 22:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I was just seeing a work in progress. Though I will have to watch out for the North Yorkshire ones which slip out of the Yorkshire and the Humber region! Keith D (talk) 22:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My Fault Keith, as suggested rather than have loads of cats with just a couple of entries suggested we should have one Yorkshire category, but now superseded by Yorkshire and Humberside, so can you delete the redundant [[Category:Power_stations_in_Yorkshire]] please. (N,E,S,West Yorkshire versions will probably need to go as well when Fintan264 has edited the entries). BulldozerD11 (talk) 00:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry inadvertently put Talk:Keith D into catagory Powerstations in Yorkshire, now fixed -OOps getting hang of wiki coding - BulldozerD11 (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok Keith I'll try and remember that tip - BulldozerD11 (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Glasgow citations

Thanks for noting the error in my recent citations - much appreciated. --GeorgeRob (talk) 07:52, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2008

Delivered August 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 23:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Watchlist

I have created a watchlist page at WikiProject Yorkshire/Articles. I can give you the source-code if would like...you will need Python running on your computer. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 03:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have added the talk pages in, the watchlist is now split into 3 pages:

• WikiProject Yorkshire/Articles - Article pages
• WikiProject Yorkshire/Articles/Page1 - Talk pages
• WikiProject Yorkshire/Articles/Page2 - Others

I have add the source to:

• WikiProject Yorkshire/Articles/Source - Source code

Yes I can run it when you need me to (just leave me a note). If I am unavailable, any bot-op (who knows pywikipedia framework) can use the above source-code and create the watchlist for you. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Great ! Well done.--Harkey (talk) 05:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

		The Genuine Yorkshire Rose
		To KeithD for continuing tireless contributions to WikiProject Yorkshire

Well deserved ! --Harkey (talk) 05:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Keith D (talk) 09:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

manual copy/edit moves

Hello, I'don't know whether you have noticed the entry at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Lysy_making_manual_copy.2Fedit_moves? I guess not, as it is not marked "Resolved" yet. I find it somewhat astounding that you, according to WP:AGF, gave User:Lysy a rather friendly introduction at User_talk:Lysy#Your_edits_to_Kulmerland even though Lysy is an experienced editor who often made use of the "Move tab at the top of the page", especially in matters regarding Poland. Lysy's Kulmerland to Chełmno Land‎ manual moves, made as a proper move was not possible and WP:RM would not lead to the desired outcome, definitely fall into the "area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to Eastern Europe)", for which the Digwuren ArbCom case has Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Digwuren#Discretionary_sanctions as remedies available to "Any uninvolved administrator", which you seem to be. I suggest to you to add Lysy to the two dozen editors already placed on the List of editors placed under editing restriction. Thank you in advance. -- Matthead  Discuß   13:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Kulmerland rename

Hi Keith, thank you for your friendly message about the Kulmerland article move. May I ask you to have another look at the very recent history of the article move and you'll immediately see what happened there. A user suggested to rename the article a land in Poland to its German name "Kulmerand". This was contested by another user, who suggested a WP:RM procedure. Still, the first user renamed the article, and purposefully edited the remaining redirect so that the move cannot be reverted. That was the reason for my manual move back, that you reverted. What would be your advice on the course of action ? --Lysy^talk 13:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The "contesting user", who suggested a WP:RM procedure, could not provide any evidence for "Chełmno Land". Nor could anybody else, in 4 four months of waiting (in fact since 2004) , back up the semi Polish name. And you have not provided any source either, Lysy. WP:V needs to be respected, thus I moved after months of patience. -- Matthead  Discuß   15:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

As an editor in May suggested the original move would have been best processed through WP:RM to give it a wider audience, but there was only a single objection and that was over the figures quoted so a move would be inevitable, especially after 4 months with no other comments. Moving the article then editing the redirect is certainly something that should not be done just to keep the article at a name you want it, I would have got the article move protected if it was going to be a problem. Cut & paste is definitely not to be done as it splits the edit history, if it is uncontroversial you just add {{db-move}} to the redirect and an admin will delete the redirect ready for a move. I would suggest that you file a request at WP:RM if there is evidence that the article should be renamed back to "Chełmno Land" and that the title stand until such time. Keith D (talk) 16:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Keith. I thought that WP:RM was the procedure for obviously controversial moves, and that Matthead should follow it, especially when explicitly asked. I agree that I should have not manually reverted the move but I was not sure what to do. However, I'm concerned that if nobody reacts to Matthead deliberately gaming the system, it will become an accepted practice. --Lysy^talk 16:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to bug you with this, I know it's nothing nice but since you've stepped in, I'd like to understand what happened. As you know Matthead renamed the article and then edited the redirect to prevent a revert. Since you've reverted me but not Matthead, does it mean that such behaviour as his is acceptable on English wikipedia ? I've had a longer wikibreak recently because of similar experiences of having to deal with users gaming the system rather than working on the contents. Now, I'm rather frustrated by the situation and I consider if I should escalate it but if such behaviour is now considered normal and accepted then I would rather not waste anybody's time, including mine. Please advise. --Lysy^talk 17:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that you will not get very far with this, it appears to already have become a method of fixing the name and making people go through a debate. Admin Piotrus appears to have been the pioneer of the method but nothing has been done to stop its use. I personally would not condone the deliberate use of the method of fixing the name of an article. In this case I think that the move was made after sufficient time for objection, I decided not to take the matter further as Matthead was advocating at WP:ANI as he had inflamed the situation by doing the edit of the redirect. I would suggest initiating a move request and see what the outcome is. Many things here I find frustrating but I have to live with them. Keith D (talk) 18:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The last thing I want to do is wasting time. --Lysy^talk 18:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey pal, thanks for this. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 00:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Watchlist

Keith, AWB has a new feature that can help in creating watchlists. It has a Save list option that can save to a "csv file with wikimarkup". You can generate your article lists in a number of ways (using category, using template links etc), and use this feature to save the list to a text file. You can then copy and paste to the watchlist page. This feature is not available in the stable release yet, it is available in the SVN snapshot. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 10:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have been trying to work out how to run the script you created for me and looks like I need to have a bot account and approval for a bot. Keith D (talk) 10:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You don't need a bot approval and a bot account for a small task like this (few edits once in a few weeks). You can configure the user_config.py file with your regular account. I think using AWB is easier, you can run it with your regular account. If are not already, you will need to get registered to use it. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 10:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. I am registered for AWB but only use it occasionally when I have a lot of repetitive edits to make. If I can use my own account for script then that sounds good. I have already installed the appropriate files but not created a configuration file, so may give it a try later today. Keith D (talk) 10:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I gave that go last night to a different file name and it worked. I moved the results back over the existing. So thanks for the help in getting this working. Keith D (talk) 17:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome! Glad I could help. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 22:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Sunderland

Hi. My mistake, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for letting me know. I'll get round to restoring and fixing the refs as soon as. Regards, Craigy (talk) 19:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Whitby and Pickering Railway article - your comments

Keith - I think I have addressed comment 4, at least the ISBN is now a valid link and two source searches find the correct book.

As for the other comments, for (1) what sort of Infobox are you suggesting ? I could produce something based on the NYMR one, which deals with much of the same line today. I doubt a meaningful line diagram would be easy since the W&P did not have stations, with the possible exceptions of the two termini.

I was probably thinking more of a line diagram as it is difficult to visualise from the text, though the NYMR box would be good if the diagram is not suitable.

(2) should be possible since I did something similar elsewhere (Levisham railway station).

Page numbers are always good to give so that people can find the information without having to read the whole book.

(3) I do not understand - could you explain further please.

That is really a catch for all of the layout things that need looking at for GA or better articles. Like putting the references after the punctuation, non-breaking spaces & em-dashes, checking all the links go to articles rather than dab pages etc.

Looking at the article a bit closer on this point -

• there needs to be consistency in the use of '&' and 'and' in the name
• the other sources section at the end gives what looks like an ISBN number in brackets, if so needs formatting to create a link.
• the lead needs improving as it does not really give any context to the article, it mentions Whitby at the end of first sentence but there is more than one Whitby around, New Zealand and Canada spring to mind.

Thanks for your review / comments.

XTOV (talk) 23:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I have added replies between your text. Glad to see that they were useful, as you wonder if they are looked at when doing them. I think it better to look at the article rather than have a bot just give them a rating and no one ever look at the article to see if there is anything the authors can do to improve it. Keith D (talk) 14:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The number that 'looks like an ISBN number in brackets', actually (S.B.N 85409-553-5) is really a 'Standard Book Number', which predates ISBN's. That is why I did not use the ISBN template, however making it up to 10 digits by adding a leading zero allowed me to treat it as an ISBN, at least Google Book Search recognised it and found the correct title. So I guess I could cheat and make out it is an ISBN.

As for the rest of your helpful comments, I will address them as time allows, thanks for the help and advice XTOV (talk) 19:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Mappin and Webb

Keith can Admins find if articles have been deleted as the Firm of Mappin and Webb has loads of red links and about 20 articles that could link to it, so wondering if there was one and it got AfDed ? as famous Sheffield co that made famous trophy's, medals, silverware ect as well as had a famous London branch + famous people worked for them - --BulldozerD11 (talk) 02:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

There has never been an article of that name as far as I can see. There are currently 5 articles with links to it, there may be others with the text in but unlinked. Keith D (talk) 13:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Created it now, can you have look Keith, I'm not happy with the lead section, added it to local Wiki projects, Thanks will find the link articles ---BulldozerD11 (talk) 23:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Quick look and it is OK apart from the lead as you said. Needs to be a summary of the article but not sure what you could put there, may be what the company does needs spelling out there. Keith D (talk) 23:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Adwick railway station

Thank you for pointing out to me that the link was lost to the line. I was fix this now. Year1989 (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry but I could not work out the S-rail templates the previous ones were a lot easier to use. Keith D (talk) 20:44, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It has now been done. Hopefully when fully in use s-rail will be easier to manage as all links and colours are managed from a central source so if changes are needed they can be implemented easily instead of changing each page. The links to the lines is dealt with in Template:National_Rail_lines/branches. Year1989 (talk) 20:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I looked at S-rail/branches and could not find anything suitable. By the way how do you get the Historical & Disused sections into the same block using S-rail? Keith D (talk) 20:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The s-rail templates do not yet exist for Historical and Dissused railways (only "s-rail-national" exists to use). Mixing "rail line" and s-rail together can get some strange results so I have currently separated them. I will talk with user who has a wider knowledge of s-rail to see if the user can put something together for Historical and Dissused railways. Once the templates exist I will add them back together. Year1989 (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Burnsall gallery

Retry. Thanks for interpolating images. However I will reopen gallery, as I will be adding, in the next few days, images illus. of the village, notably of bridge and church. I'm a photographer and contributor, staying for a while in the area. (Unfamiliar machine does not show tildes: Alethe.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alethe (talk • contribs) 21:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Neglected to sign Burnsall note on unfamiliar machine. Alethe¬¬¬¬ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alethe (talk • contribs) 21:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have just put the gallery back in as I have added an infobox to article. Would be good if you could get a good picture to go at the top of the infobox. The village one is a bit too far away to use there as needs to be expanded to see detail. Keith D (talk) 22:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that I've noted your kind reply and am waiting for rains to stop so I can get closer view you request without grey skies, which make it all look dim! Alethe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alethe (talk • contribs) 06:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

School page

I started a new stub "Salendine Nook High School", West Yorkshire. I defended it against deletion, and I wonder if you could watch the page for WikiProject Yorkshire. It seems to me that edits to schools pages gather momentum when people who know the school start to notice it. Snowman (talk) 23:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I have put it on my watchlist for now. It will go on the project watchlist, as it is tagged, when I next regenerate the list of tagged articles. There are a number of people using that to watch articles for the project. Keith D (talk) 23:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I regenerated the project watchlist last night so the article should now be on there for all to watch. Keith D (talk) 10:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Yorkshire Portal and Newsletter

I'd be happy to contribute something about the portal for the newsletter. A lack of response seems to be common on the portal peer review page so I haven't taken too much notice of it. I'm planning to do some more tidying up on the Yorkshire Portal then submit it to be assessed as a featured portal candidate. --Kaly99 (talk) 21:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I've added a section to the newsletter, I removed the list of info boxes to make room. Please feel free to change the section's position, reword or make any changes that are needed. --Kaly99 (talk) 19:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I have only just got back from holiday and wading through my watchlist at the moment, so will take a look when I get through it. Keith D (talk) 19:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Burnsall, Yorks. formatting

Have added 'zooming in' photos of village from different pts of compass, now moving to features such as bridge and church--incl. interior. (Note that this is organized illus., not vanity snaps.) With yr expertise, w'd you be so kind as to relocate the static facts box so that the album may be developed free of it? Thanks, Alethe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alethe (talk • contribs) 06:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes always appear top right of articles as that is their standard position. The gallery, if there is one, should go at the end of the article. Unfortunately there is little text in the article which means the gallery is squashed to the side of the infobox. Ideally the photos should be in the text and there should be no gallery as they are generally discouraged in our MOS. If you want the gallery to come below the infobox full width then add {{clr}} just above the gallery to force it to come below the infobox. Keith D (talk) 10:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Meadowhall Centre

Keith can you have a look at Meadowhall centre as looks like conflict of interest edits removing negative comments and adding load of PR stuff. Was reverting it but got an edit clash, and other edits made whilst looking at policies. Left comment on Talk page about it for others opinions. Thanks --BulldozerD11 (talk) 14:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks a difficult one as the removed text is mainly historical detail now as from 2005-2007. I would think that the detail needs to be summarised and reinserted in some sort of historical context. The environmental section looks like rather POV though not an exact copy of the original so probably not a copy-vio though not really up on this sort of thing. It looks like someone who knows the situation and has subtly changed the text to avoid the copy-violation removal. Though needs to be rewritten for tone and probably some third party take on it found to give it a balance. Keith D (talk) 17:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank Keith, the ref links were added after by a 3rd party. Just the tone of text said PR, and removal of the text which was referenced looked fishy IMO. Can you send a suitable welcome template with WP policies statements (or point me to one as seen several but not sure were the source is) - --BulldozerD11 (talk) 19:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

There are several welcome templates, the one I tend to use is {{Welcomeg}} for registered users there is also {{Welcome-anon}} for anon users. If you find time you could restructure the deleted info and put it in a history type section, I have done some minor edits to the top & added a {{Tone}} tag under your {{Unreferenced}} tag. Keith D (talk) 19:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hearsall Common

I have done editing to the "Hearsall Common" so I can not rate it. I wonder if you could rate it for WP Coventry. Snowman (talk) 11:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

History of Wetherby

Regarding the nomination of a fact on the History of Wetherby page, ito the Did You Know? Section. It seems like a good idea. How would I go about doing this.Mtaylor848 (talk)

Monarch's Way

Hi, your suggestion to put the Monarch's Way sandbox on a sub-page rather than directly on the talk page and transcluding it on to the talk page seems like a good idea, but I don't know how to do that - could you do it for us?— Rod ^talk 09:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I have set it up as Talk:Monarch's Way/Sandbox and put an edit link in to the talk page so people can click on it to edit the text. Keith D (talk) 09:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - it would have taken me hours to work out how to do all that - even if I had the rights. Now can you add anything about the route in Warwickshire etc?— Rod ^talk 09:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I may be able to find out some details of the Warwickshire end and take photos if any are needed. Keith D (talk) 09:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Gawp's redirect titles.

It seems to be procedure to salt them, otherwise the next bombing we get, he'll have all those titles to use again. HalfShadow 00:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Keith D (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10