User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 25

Your expertise is needed

Yet again R. Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2017 August 24 has shown up in the cat. My searching leads me to think it might have something to do with the edits trying to fix the portal on the 24th but a) I could be wrong and b) if I'm right I'm not sure how to fix things. Whatever you can do about this will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 16:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

It is certainly something to do with those edits by BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs), the specific edit that caused the problem is this one which removed the <onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude>, thus causing the entire article to be transcluded instead of that particular figure. The main question surely is, why is The Simpsons transcluded on so many pages - or indeed, at all? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:19, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix. I don't know the answer to your question other than to say that Matt's creation seems to get everywhere :-) Who would have thought that possible for characters that got there start on the Tracey Ullman show! MarnetteD|Talk 18:51, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

RR, I removed the <onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude> because it broke the portal, causing it to transclude only the episode count, rather than the lead of the article.

@MarnetteD: I see from this edit[1] by Certes that the solution is to use the following code to transclude only the episode count: {{Template parameter value|The Simpsons|Infobox television||num_episodes}}.

This is clearly being done to centralise the episode count, but it does seem to me to be a complex way to do it. I think it would be simpler to just have a subpage containing only the count, e.g. The Simpsons/episodes count. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:52, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Editors wanted to update the episode count in only one place and created {{The Simpsons episode count}}. After objections to storing content in a template, it was decided to transclude the entire article, using <onlyinclude> to hide everything but the number. That technique prevents the article from being transcluded in other ways. Previous discussion is here and here. Certes (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I'd forgotten that. I stand by my Keep comment of 15:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:44, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree with RR64. The template was a simpler and more elegant solution. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Family Guy (unused), South Park (2 uses), and SpongeBob SquarePants (5 uses) use a similar technique. All pages which transclude them seem to correctly expect an episode count rather than hoping in vain for the whole article or its lede. Certes (talk) 21:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

...and a pile of others. Certes (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Redrose64's Northernrailwaysfan edit reverting ban

I am forbidding you from reverting my edits. I am afraid you have been banned from reverting my edits. PERMANENTLY.Now you have been unbanned.Northernrailwaysfan (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

That's not really how Wikipedia works - see Wikipedia:Ownership of content and WP:BRD for some of our principals. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:12, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

@Northernrailwaysfan: Which part of WP:BAN would this fall under? Which part of WP:V is thereby repealed? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:43, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

That's a laugh, you can't "unban" me because I have never been banned; also, since you do not have the authority to ban, you also do not have the authority to lift a ban. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:21, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Could you please help me with edits?

I may need help with editing on British Rail pages. Northernrailwaysfan (talk) 19:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Please make your requests in a more global venue, such as WT:UKRAIL. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:23, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

expert help with maintenance cats requested

Hi RedRose64,

Some of us at WP:PROCC have decided to audit internal links to Climate change because that phrase can either mean to point at Climate change (general concept) or global warming.

Not that it matters, but for full disclosure and context, the former article "climate change" was just renamed Climate change (general concept), and a DAB page Climate change was created to point at global warming. There may be move review discussions forthcoming. If not there will almost certainly be an RM proposed to change the title of global warming.

So all that is going on, and none of it matters for the reason I am writing you. Before the reform effort started we had a massive problem with WP:EGGs, and we still have that problem, and no matter what the outcome of future possible discussions the problem will remain until some eds volunteer to do the grunt work to fix it. And that's why I am writing you, to ask for your expert help to support the grunt work.

Specifically, we need to harness the power of maintenance categories to track our progress as we go through all the pages with "What links here" internal links to "climate change". Eds will massage those in some appropriate way (details TBD) so they point at either Climate change (general concept) or global warming and then switch the maintenance category from (whatever the words might be) "climate change links NOT assessed" to "climate change links verified"). Obviously, if the article titles go through future changes we will need to do some fell-swoop updates so the new tweak(s) is auto-applied to the "Verified" category.

The key thing right now is to figure out a simple maintenance category system for simply tracking articles we have and have not reviewed. "What links here" might be enough, but is kind of a kludge.

Is this something you could help us with? If not you, then who? FYI, I also asked user United Statesian, Thanks for any advice etc you can offer NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:42, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Related: Wikipedia:Help desk#Efficiently verifying and where necessary correcting thousands of links to "Foo". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

My new edit on British Rail Class 800

I have made an edit on British Rail Class 800 page for depots as 'North Pole (the former Eurostar depot)'. If you are not happy with the edit I have made, you are welcome to revert it. :D Northernrailwaysfan (talk) 15:32, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Why are you posting this here? Discussions about improving an article belong on the talk page for the article, which in this case is Talk:British Rail Class 800. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

You are moderator for Northernrailwaysfan's talk page

	Congratulations! You are a moderator for Northernrailwaysfan's talk page
	You are now a moderator for Northernrailwaysfan's talk page! Northernrailwaysfan (talk) 18:30, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

What the heck are you talking about? Wikipedia does not have "moderators", and you cannot control who posts to your talk page, see WP:OWNTALK. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:04, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Llannerch railway station

This is an interesting one. It was a private station and is listed in Quick as such and there do seem to be the sources that say that Dod as a director of the company had a right to stop trains for his use. The interesting part is that there is no evidence (that I've found) that there was any physical station existed. Even old maps from the time just after Dod's right expired don't show anything. The only infrastructure was a siding to a brickworks. My speculation that I cannot prove or disprove is that there was no station and that Dod simply informed the station master as Trefnant or St Asaph that he wished to join/alight from a certain train and that the footplate crew were given instructions to stop at the brickworks for this to happen. Nthep (talk) 20:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Welsh 170s sources

I'll put them in this afternoon Anamyd (talk) 11:08, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

The South-West England section, not written by me, also doesn't have any sources. Why haven't you also marked that as such...? Anamyd (talk) 11:12, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@Anamyd: Maybe because I didn't see it being added at the time. Maybe because it was added several years before I registered here. Maybe because one of your edit summaries was very much against the policies of verifiability and no original research. Either way, WP:OTHERCONTENT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:59, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Another one

Hello again R. The Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates is full of editor dashboards. I've tried tracking down the pp causing it and have come up empty. I also tried letting several days pass in the hope that the protection might expire and then Musikbot would take care of things but that hasn't worked either. As in the past your help will be much appreciated. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 22:25, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

As ever, this is one of the components of {{admin dashboard}} having a prot template that is not inside a <noinclude>...</noinclude>; and once again, it's Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism - the edit concerned is this one and Finball30 (talk · contribs) has clearly ignored the comments that follow directly after. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Good grief I thought I had checked AIV at one point but obviously not. Thank you for fixing it and for your patience in dealing with my missing things like this. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 23:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Book decade categories

Also, since Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 6, more early book decade categories have been created. – Fayenatic London 23:20, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Presumably you are thinking of these:

• Category:800s books (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - 2 redirects
• Category:910s books (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - empty
• Category:970s books (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - 3 redirs
• Category:980s books (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - 2 redirs
• Category:994 books (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - empty

Like the first lot, these were created by Sugrammr (talk · contribs), and the three non-empty cats were all previously deleted following Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 November 4#Early medieval works and books, so we do need to get Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 75#Clarification: scope of G4 resolved. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Yup. Let's try WP:C2C. By the way, I did WP:SALT the recently deleted ones that had previously been deleted. – Fayenatic London 00:01, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

2 EMR 153s on loan to WMR

Source: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=452905102026464&id=596154300775114 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen lee kh (talk • contribs) 09:27, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Stephen lee kh: Please read WP:REFBEGIN for how to add sources. Please also be aware that Facebook, being a self-published source, is not reliable enough to satisfy the policy on verifiability. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:55, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding the date formats used in citation templates. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "British Rail Class 390".The discussion is about the topic British Rail Class 390. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --DrFrench (talk) 12:33, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Question for you

Would you be interested in joining a good faith effort for new poral guidelines at User talk:Scottywong/Portal guideline workspace? I am reaching out to you completely at random because I saw you made a single post in a portal related area. Yeah I know you may be asking yourself "so why me?" It would really help us if there were someone who has been uninvolved share their views on the matter. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Template removal

Thank you for removing the {{use dmy dates}} template from Talk:British Rail Class 390. I didn't realise they weren't allowed on Talk pages.

The reason I added it was to demonstrate the effect of the CS1 templates on date formatting and I didn't want anyone accusing me of 'spoofing' or 'faking' the effect. Thank you. --DrFrench (talk) 23:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

{{use dmy dates}} doesn't do anything other than put an article into a category, in this case Category:Use dmy dates from November 2019. It has two purposes: (i) it shows when an article was last verified to use that date format consistently; (ii) there are certain bots that look for inconsistent date formats in articles, and when such inconsistencies are found, it shows that bot which form should be favoured. It goes hand-in-hand with templates like {{use British English}}, which is similarly a categorise-only template, unlike {{British English}} which displays a banner. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Redrose64: Please see the Use dmy dates template documentation for an explanation of how it interacts with CS1 (e.g. cite book, cite web) templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:41, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

They must have changed it then (for "they", read Trappist the monk (talk · contribs), who has made many obscure changes to the CS1 templates that are difficult to track), nothing is said about it at Template:Cite web#Date. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:07, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Documentation fixed; thanks for pointing that out. Discussions about CS1 templates, including detailed announcements about feature updates and bug fixes with links to discussions about those updates and fixes, occur at Help talk:Citation Style 1. The announcement about this feature was made in April 2019. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Doctor Day

Hello DQ. Six years today ago we were at the tippy top of the timey wimey 50th anniversary celebrations. It will always be a special memory that fans saw The Day of the Doctor at the same time all over the planet :-) Things are quieter now but there is still a little extra joy when the 23rd falls on a Saturday. I'm glad to finally be leaving a message for ya that does not involve the incorrect pp cat!! Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 05:40, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Names in other languages

Hi Redrose64...Can I ask if there are rules to having names in other languages eg first sentence of this? Whispyhistory (talk) 12:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

This should be covered by MOS:NAME. If not, try asking at WP:HD. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Will have a read. Thanks. Whispyhistory (talk) 06:08, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Northernrailwaysfan

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Northernrailwaysfan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:11, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

For my TPSs, this is because all the suspected sockpuppets have since been confirmed, and now live at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Northernrailwaysfan. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

About Template:WikiProject_India

With respect to this edit, default values might be undesirable, but the lack of a default for |field= is causing errors that are logged in Category:Pages_where_expansion_depth_is_exceeded. A better solution would be for the parent template to deal with error, which it doesn't do when the |field-importance= parameter is missing for |field=.   Jts1882 | talk  20:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Jts1882: I've always been suspicious of those four pairs of parameters. Use of any of them will put a page into Category:India articles using field parameter - and there are presently just over 500 of those, out of well over 200,000 pages using {{WikiProject India}} - that is 0.25% of WP India pages. But the main problem is the total lack of validation: I could put {{WikiProject India|field=Eggs|field-importance=Top}} and it would display "This page is supported by the Eggs workgroup." which is fine if such a workgroup exists - but there is no check for that; worse, it also puts the page into Category:Top-importance India Eggs articles. Maybe it's time to get rid of them all. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:55, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

The intent of those |field= parameters seems to have been to create statistics even when no taskforce (see {{WikiProject India}}).

The pipe in the |fieldN-importance= parameters (this edit) doesn't fix the expansion depth issue. The pages have come back at Category:Pages_where_expansion_depth_is_exceeded. I don't understand why it causes the error (some recursion?) so have no clue where to look for the problem.   Jts1882 | talk  11:57, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

English stations: category sorting

Concerning your undos of my edits to the categorization of Railway Stations in Newmarket and Railway Stations in Cromer:

I did this in an effort to introduce some consistency in the categories. Instead of space sorting, how about using an asterisk instead? This has been done (and not by me!) in categories including Category:Railway stations in Cornwall, Category:Railway stations in Essex and Category:Railway stations in Greater Manchester (not an exhaustive list). If you agree, I'd gladly introduce this. Should you oppose my suggestion, perhaps you can make sure this sorting is removed everywhere it is currently used. At least then it would be consistent (though not optimal in my opinion). --Eddyspeeder (talk) 20:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

At the three categories that you name, there are no pages that are sorted using a space as the sortkey. Each has one page that is sorted using an asterisk:

• Category:Railway stations in Cornwall contains List of railway stations in Cornwall
• Category:Railway stations in Essex contains List of railway stations in Essex
• Category:Railway stations in Greater Manchester contains List of railway stations in Greater Manchester

in each case, the article covers the same area as the category, so WP:EPON applies. For the cases of Railway stations in Newmarket and Railway stations in Cromer (please observe capitalisation) these are articles which do not have a corresponding eponymous category, the pairings would be:

• Category:Railway stations in Newmarket does not exist so cannot contain Railway stations in Newmarket
• Category:Railway stations in Cromer does not exist so cannot contain Railway stations in Cromer

These are in Suffolk and Norfolk respectively, so

• Category:Railway stations in Suffolk would contain List of railway stations in Suffolk which does not exist
• Category:Railway stations in Norfolk would contain List of railway stations in Norfolk which does not exist

In short: Newmarket is in Suffolk, but is not the whole of Suffolk; and Cromer is in Norfolk, but is not the whole of Norfolk. So they should sort alphabetically, not be forced to the top. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Class 158 article

The three car 158s (excluding 158798) at GWR are not Class 158/0s, they are Class 158/9s - Coradia175 (talk) 20:42, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

What is your source for that? Here's mine. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

The "1589xx" unit numbers - Coradia175 (talk) 22:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

That doesn't mean a thing. The fourth digit may correspond with a subclass, but it doesn't have to, especially when a subclass has more than 100 members. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Virgin Trains has gone

Redrose, have you heard that Virgin Trains has gone? Eastmidlandsrailwayfan (talk) 09:19, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes. It happened just under ten hours ago. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:46, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

And they maintained their reputation to the end; the last London–Manchester train under the Virgin name broke down at Stockport and left the passengers to get buses into Manchester. (Towards the end you'd only have known the company still existed from squinting closely at the TOC name on the departure boards—the last of the Virgin branding had long since disappeared.) ‑ Iridescent 2 10:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

dab on Template:Northern (train operating company) route 9

As I've got disambiguations wrong for stations in the past can I ask for your help? On Template:Northern (train operating company) route 9 there is a link to Mill Hill railway station. I think this should be Mill Hill railway station (Lancashire). When I look at Template:Stnlnk I see an example [[Bramley railway station (Hampshire)|Bramley]] but when I use this format there seems to be a stray comma - help appreciated.— Rod ^talk 20:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it by removing the brackets around "Lancashire" but its hardly intuitive.— Rod ^talk 20:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

It says

{{stnlnk|Bramley|Hampshire}} expands to [[Bramley railway station (Hampshire)|Bramley]].

Therefore,

{{stnlnk|Mill Hill|Lancashire}} expands to [[Mill Hill railway station (Lancashire)|Mill Hill]].

and if you follow this link: Mill Hill you will find that it goes to the right place. I don't see anything on the template doc that implies that brackets should be used. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Sticky fingers

Re this edit, that must have been a simple misclick on my part. I have never knowingly imported a short description from Wikidata, which I don't trust. I have the Shortdesc helper installed in order to detect vandalized short descriptions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:55, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true. No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well R. MarnetteD|Talk 03:38, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing you a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Mystical Nativity (Filippo Lippi) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 16:39, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

New question

Hello R. Module:Protected edit request/sandbox has shown up in the cat. I am wondering if it has anything to do with this edit. From what I can find that is the only transclusion with recent activity. Of course it could be something else that I missed. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 19:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

It may have been this edit by Fish and karate (talk · contribs) - do any other module doc pages have a {{pp}} template? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

You found it R. I added the noinclude tags and that took care of things. I just hadn't seen anything quite like the edit I found. As ever thanks for checking on things. MarnetteD|Talk 21:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I have gotten all manner of confused on how to get the Janet Jackson article out of the cat R. Your help will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 12:06, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

It's the {{pp-move-indef}} right at the top. MelanieN (talk · contribs) reduced the level of move protection from full to semi yesterday, without removing the template. Either the full move prot should be restored, or the template removed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:57, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for untangling this for me R. MarnetteD|Talk 05:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Merry Christmas, Redrose64! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 19:05, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Train reporting number

On this page, I fixed the spelling of Birmingham. The addition of </li> was just an incidental edit for syntax highlighting reasons. Leaving unclosed html tags means the whole edit window becomes highlighted. I don't think closing the tags changes the visual output. kennethaw88 • talk 22:15, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

A Joyous Yuletide to you!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Redrose64, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Happy editing, JACKINTHEBOX • TALK 08:33, 23 December 2019 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

seasons Greetings

	seasons Greetings
	Merry Christmas Redrose64 and to others in Oxford. See you soon. Thank you for everything. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:57, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi! Thank you for being kind enough to mention me about the easier ways to formatting tags in articles. I have to say, you have a nice user page! Regards from Chile, from an es.wiki editor! --Rjelves (talk) 14:46, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For fixing someones greeting mess across various talkpages,Good to know it's not me causing mayhem with a messed up template this year! *cough* unlike last year *cough*, Anyway just wanted to says thanks for fixing that!, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:25, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Oh, it happens every year. It's usually different people, and different errors - the commonest are unclosed tables or unclosed divs. Often it's from a WP:SUBSTituted template or user subpage, and if I can identify that, I fix it to try and prevent further occurrences. This year I have found misclosed markup in the messages from 7&6=thirteen (talk · contribs) and Buster7 (talk · contribs) - this second one being well over 100 instances of a missing </center> tag going back to 11 December. I'll see if I can fix those tomorrow. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:41, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

display-authors

BTW, this edit with |display-authors= does not display 'et al'. If that was your intention, then either the value of display-authors must be less than the total authors in the template (i.e., removing at least one author from display), or you must set |display-authors=et al. --Izno (talk) 18:38, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

@Izno: I don't want it to display "et al", I want it to display all nine of the authors that the book actually has, giving credit where credit is due. At the time that I built the template, {{cite book}} would throw an error if exactly nine authors were specified but |displayauthors= was blank or absent. I guess Trappist the monk (talk · contribs) must have changed the code again: it's impenetrable. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:01, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

The code was indeed changed because you can now add as many authors as you please. The warning at 9 previously was due to a template limitation pre-Lua. --Izno (talk) 00:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Further to what Editor Izno wrote, handling of unlimited numbers of names in author and other name-lists is indeed old (in April 2015, this edit added support for |display-authors=etal – I'm ok taking the blame for that. Unlimited name-list support was implemented before that and in fact, was not done by me. If you find the Lua impenetrable, the template doc might be more accessible. Of course, editors do complain that cs1|2 documentation is also incomprehensible ... The documentation changed with this edit to remove mention of the limitations imposed by {{citation/core}}. So, nothing new here.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:39, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you and season's greetings

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• File:Christmas Train Lanterns With Capiz.jpg

Thank you for fixing a message on my talk page. Merry Christmas and happy new year.
↠Pine (✉) 02:57, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

South Ruislip - West Ealing - High Wycombe parliamentary train

Hello there, I notice you keep reverting my edits for the stations above. I try to make it so that people know that the train goes from West Ealing to High Wycombe - however in the edit you recently reverted it only shows as the terminus of the first part from South Ruislip - however there is no mention of the latter section to High Wycombe - except on the High Wycombe page, which is no use. Please let me know what I am doing wrong... IamMattDavies (talk) 14:52, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Routeboxes show the stations on either side. If you look at a map and follow the line from West Ealing, you pass through South Ruislip to get to High Wycombe. Whichever way you look at it, West Ealing is in no way part way along the line - it is the terminus. It is only an intermediate station for those few trains that still run between Paddington and Greenford, and also for local trains running between Paddington and Hayes & Harlington (or points west).

Thank you!

Your wealth of knowledge about computers and code is amazing. The extent of what I know is quite simply to not use "beef stew" as a password - it's not stroganoff. 😊 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 00:46, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Apart from finding a website in the first place, logging in is pretty much up there with the fundamentals. Always use a strong password, never give out clues as to what it might be. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:22, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

My password is "password". It's brilliant! Nobody will ever guess. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:23, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Happy new year

Whispyhistory (talk) 00:39, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Unexpected problem

I moved the List of rail accidents (2010–present) to List of rail accidents (2010–2019) per prior consensus at the talk page. This has had the effect of altering the ToC called by {{lists of rail accidents years}} from 2010s to 2020s! Any idea why this happened and how to fix it? Mjroots (talk) 06:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

This should fix it. -Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

How do I become a Wikipedia administrator?

I may need help to become a Wikipedia administrator, can you help me, please? Eastmidlandsrailwayfan (talk) 09:21, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

@Eastmidlandsrailwayfan: I have replied on this matter at Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy#Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2019. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:45, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, is there any reason Eastmidlandsrailwayfan hasn't been blocked as sock yet?! :D ——SN54129 10:30, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Because Redrose and I take AGF to the extreme and assume that until a CU says otherwise he's not a User:Mr Fenton's Helicopters sock. Commons:Special:Contributions/Eastmidlandsrailwayfan makes AGF an increasingly difficult position to maintain. ‑ Iridescent 10:36, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Just so  :) I agree re. AGF, and I'd generally apply it the first time someone socks—after all, I don't think we explicitly tell people they can't create another account when they are blocked do we? I mean, it's something that gets found out the hardway. <---might be wrong on this; I'd probably have to get blocked again to find out.

But when it's their eighth sock—! ——SN54129 10:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I was pretty sure, but was waiting for more WP:ROPE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:55, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

This is so obvious it's unreal. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

So he creates the account at 15:47, templates himself as a sock five minutes later...and is blocked the following minute?! Must've been bored... ——SN54129 19:36, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Sutton Park Line

Hi Redrose64

You recently made an unnecessary revert on the Sutton Park Line to passengers services reintroduced in future. Now you've accused me of an "unsourced opinion/speculation". I did link Aldridge station page as a reference to my opinion. So can you please explain how this is unsourced speculation? https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-country/huge-step-new-aldridge-railway-17479108 and it mentions that the station is a step forward to reopening the station and line to passengers. So unless the documents are fake... this article is completely compulsory with the line in general as Aldridge is on the line.

Signed: JoshuaistheFalco, 07:04, 4th January 2020 JoshuaIsTheFalco (talk) 07:04, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

On the matter of sourcing, see the policy on verifiability; links to other Wikipedia articles do not count as sources for the purposes of satisfying this policy. On the matter of speculation, remember that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, advice to which you have been directed many times in the past.

You link an article from the Birmingham Mail above. Let me quote you some phrases and sentences:

• £10m funding is needed to take the proposal to the next stage - so there's no funding, which means that the proposal might not happen
• It is hoped - this is pure wishful thinking, a very long way from a certainty
• A new feasibility survey - feasibility surveys are no more than somebody sitting at a desk and doing some calculations. Every major project should begin with one, but that in no way means that further progress will occur.
• deemed the project viable - still doesn't mean that it will happen. Money has to be found first.
• ordered the organisation to draw up a business case - a business case is the next step, but it's not happened. And there is still no money.

Finally: if you have reliable sources, then cite them when you add the material to the article, don't make other people search. I should remind you that you have been blocked in the past for persistently failing to adhere to this advice. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay so revert the edit Aldridge station page then Aldridge railway station. As for your crystal ball nonsense. I'm not the only one who has done it before. So dont attack me for using a page which has Mainline67 or along that wording making a so called fake statement... thank you kindly and have a nice day

Signed: Joshuaisthefalco, 10:22, 4 January 2020 JoshuaIsTheFalco (talk) 10:22, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Of course you're not the first person to use Wikipedia to speculate upon what might happen. It is because of such predictions that we created the guideline in the first place: we don't make rules just because we want to - we make rules when there is a demonstrable problem that indicates a need for rules. Just because someone has done something before does not make it OK for you to do the same thing. See also WP:OTHERCONTENT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Translating a non-English article

Hi..I can't remember how to do this. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

The content translation tool. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay...it was for fr:Achille Cléophas Flaubert. I'll read the link you sent and will see if I can understand it. Thank you. Otherwise...can I just rewrite it in English? Whispyhistory (talk) 18:07, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Reverting edits

Hi can you assist me, I'm having a "reverting war" on Uldale amd Ireby, Cumbria how do I take this to the next level?

Devokewater (talk) 17:44, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

First, read WP:EW. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:20, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Meon Valley Railway

Could you please cite your source for correcting my entry for the closure of Farringdon Goods from 5th August 1968 to 13th August 1968? I have 3 separate published books which all state the earlier date. Thanks Ultratorque (talk) 17:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

You changed several dates in contravention of MOS:DATE. You also filed to provide a source for your changes, see WP:BURDEN. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Estonian translation of FAQ

See et:KKK and et:Korduma kippuvad küsimused. This is re: your recent reversion of my edit to KKK (disambiguation). Heepman1997 (talk) 12:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Your edit linked the page Estonian language. There is no mention of the acronym "KKK" on that page, it therefore goes against MOS:DABENTRY (fifth bullet). Further, this is the English Wikipedia: we do not give translations of English terms into foreign languages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:08, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you and your work on Wikipedia:SVG help !

	The Technical Helper Barnstar
	For your fast and good technical answers on Wikipedia:SVG help, Thanks,  — Johannes Kalliauer - contrib. 22:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

I sometimes take a opposing position on Wikipedia:SVG_help to show another viewpoint. I hope its ok for you, It's not against you. I sometimes have a different experience, since I cannot create SVG by hands, and I mainly use tools to repair images. I think I know most SVG-rendering-bugs mentioned on phab:. Since I'm not so much on the en.wikipedia, if you think I might can add something usefull, you could ping me.  — Johannes Kalliauer - contrib. 22:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:40, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Usage figures

I just noticed that a user has not been keeping the railway station figures at five for a lot of Scottish railway stations. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

There are several culprits. I've been fixing them as I find them, and it's difficult because my watchlist has maxed out at the most recent 1,000 edits. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

RFC Talk Hunter Biden

Thanks for pointing out, is the updated rfc entry ok? RonaldDuncan (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

No, it's not, because it's made a complete mess of Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Redrose, I understand the template created a confusing entry on that project page. The best solution, in my opinion, would be for an uninvolved editor such as yourself to close and/or archive this disruptive "RfC" to add BLP violations and off-topic coatrack Original Research to Biden's article. SPECIFICO talk 22:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about the mess. It did look ok https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Politics,_government,_and_law&oldid=935779632 but then SPECIFICO put a hat template on the talk page to hide the discussion on it and then it was the mess that you saw.RonaldDuncan (talk) 11:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

3rd time lucky :) I have put in the rfc again. It was ok the last time https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Politics,_government,_and_law&oldid=935779632 apart from the hat template being put on whilst in the midst of the process. I have requested on the talk page that other editors do not hat the discussion whilst the rfc is in progress. RonaldDuncan (talk) 14:21, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

It looks fine - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Politics,_government,_and_law&oldid=935913942 - hopefully we will not have any post submission edits this time. RonaldDuncan (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:INDENTGAP

Sorry about the WP:INDENTGAP problem. Sometimes when editing discussions, reading the text in the editor, it is hard to follow the discussion. That is, where one comment ends and the next begins. If I understand WP:INDENTGAP, I should put the appropriate number of : on lines between comments from different users? Thanks, Gah4 (talk) 02:33, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

You can either close up the gap by removing the blank line (as I did), or add exactly the same number of colons at the start of the otherwise-blank line (as RexxS normally does). Which of the two that you do doesn't really matter: the point about INDENTGAP is that between two indented lines you must not leave lines that are wholly blank, because that causes one list to be closed and a new one to be started. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gah4: Redrose64 is quite right. I habitually put an indented blank line before my comment as it makes it easier for me to distinguish my post from the previous one in the edit window. Of course, you can see that in the published text, the spacing between these posts is identical, so it doesn't affect anything beyond the edit window. HTH --RexxS (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

You know how to ping me. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:16, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Yep. For my TPSs, it goes like this: Thank you, 7&6=thirteen. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:29, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

West Somerset Mineral Railway

Either way works. Its a common referencing error I encounter a lot. Just seem easier (and faster) my way. I'm aware of all the ways to fix that particular problem with that template. Thanks, I guess. Isaidnoway (talk) 21:31, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

non-displaying control characters

How did I add them? How can you see them? Rathfelder (talk) 08:58, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

This was your edit. Notice that the word "Manchester" is highlighted as a change, even though the letters making up the word are the same. This in itself is a red flag - so I copied your text and pasted it into this utility, which revealed a Unicode U+200E character, also known as left-to-right mark (LRM). These should not be present in category links. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:28, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I do hundreds of edits like this. I cant think that I did anything different here. I use Hotcat mostly. Any advice about how I can avoid doing it again? Rathfelder (talk) 15:17, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Are you copypasting the category name from somewhere? I think that there is at least one major browser which adds an unwanted LRM to the end of copypasted text. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

I use Opera, exclusively, and yes I generally copypaste the names. If I had done this often would someone have noticed? Rathfelder (talk) 22:31, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

After pasting the text, press ← Backspace once - you will probably find that the cursor doesn't move. This means that you have erased the unwanted LRM. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

• I'll try to remember. Thank you very much. Rathfelder (talk) 22:06, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Strange parameter in railway station infobox

Hi. I just removed a parameter called "1" from the article Shoeburyness railway station. Do you know what is the purpose of this parameter? The parameter was blank. Pkbwcgs (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Cyberbot II added this strange parameter in this edit from September 2015 but I don't understand why. Would the bot operator, User:Cyberpower678 be able to explain. Pkbwcgs (talk) 23:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

The same happened in Ynyswen railway station but the parameter is called "2". I still don't understand why the bot added all these pointless parameter in September 2015. Pkbwcgs (talk) 23:14, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

The pages immediately prior to the bot edits had this

{{Infobox GB station|
 | name = Shoeburyness

and this

{{Infobox UK station
|symbol=rail|
|name=Ynyswen

respectively. That is, each had an empty positional parameter which the bot was attempting to resolve. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Should I remove these empty positional parameters from the railway station articles? Pkbwcgs (talk) 12:11, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

You can if you want. They're harmless to leave. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Class 305

Hi Red Please can you take a look at this page for me. I am not sure all the references on the page are showing and am not sure how to add a Harvard reference of my own. I added my source book - Anglia East by Ian Cowley - but cannot work out how to link the information I added about 1980s departmental deployment in East Anglia to the reference. Thanks--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 11:13, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

See WP:CITESHORT. You can use either <ref>{{harvnb|Cowley|1987|p=(pagenumbers)}}</ref> or {{sfn|Cowley|1987|p=(pagenumbers)}} replacing (pagenumbers) with the actual page numbers where you found the material. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:30, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 14:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

RfC subsection

Hi, the RfC is not related to that section. It is not a follow-on. The section that is related to is Lack of neutrality not that request to edit the protected page. I thought it was a typo and fixed it.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 10:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Then the RfC should have been made a subsection of the discussion to which it directly relates, and not dumped randomly at the bottom of the page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Response to your edit summary here

Hi Redrose64,

Sorry about that. I hadn't realized there was a parameter in the Template:Initiated to mark the request as "done." Thank you and I've noted that for the future! :)

Many thanks,
Doug Mehus T·C 23:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

It's in the editnotice, displayed when you edit the page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Redrose64, Thank you Oops, sorry, I hadn't noticed that. I will try and make a more concerted effort to notice the editnotices. I'm familiar with the BLP and 1RR editnotices that, I think, sometimes they tend to go unnoticed. I'll work on that, though. Doug Mehus T·C 23:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

This edit does nothing, because {{initiated}} doesn't recognise a |nac= parameter. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Redrose64, Oh, the drop-down box at the top of that page shows that there's still a "nac" parameter. That's why I did that. Maybe we need to update the collapsed information from that page, and also Template:Initiated? Doug Mehus T·C 19:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Redrose64, By the way, have you ever thought of running of running for Bureaucrat? You are both neutral in your editor interactions and you do a lot of wikignoming and clerking around the noticeboards. You've got the technical aptitude, and I would be happy to co-nominate for you for Bureaucrat, if you ever decide you want the added responsibility. Doug Mehus T·C 19:53, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the invalid params from the editnotice. What update to Template:Initiated is necessary? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:15, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Redrose64, Thank you. Nevermind, on second look, you're right, it was just the editnotice. Doug Mehus T·C 20:47, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Railway Help

Hi there I am new to Wikipedia and want to upload a few photos I had taken of some closed railway stations. The uploader for photos keeps failing when I try to upload to the wiki page. How can I fix it as I've made my tenth. Kind regards. JoshuaGuest96 (talk) 10:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@JoshuaGuest96: If you are trying to upload to Wikipedia itself, try our Wikipedia:Help desk; but if you are trying to upload to commons:, try c:Commons:Help desk. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:41, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you RedRose64 JoshuaGuest96 (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Why not fix it then?

Hi RR64, Rather than just reverting my valid edit why not fix the info box? CrossHouses (talk) 14:42, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Which infobox? Please provide a diff. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

West Highland Line‽ CrossHouses (talk) 22:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@CrossHouses: I have made exactly one edit to the infobox of that article, and not only was it not a revert, it was more than a year ago. Please explain why you think that making the image larger than 300px wide would be beneficial, bearing WP:IMGSIZE#Infobox and lead images in mind. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi RR64 clearly you don’t remember your edit of 6 days ago? CrossHouses (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Special:Diff/937326341 CrossHouses (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I have made so many edits (over 213,000 at the last count) that I don't remember them all; so that is why I asked for a diff. Anyway, the diff that you finally provided shows that the edit concerned did not involve an infobox, it is a table; and you made such a mess of it that I couldn't work out what you were trying to do, so a reversion was the cleanest action. You should preview all your edits before saving, it helps to pick up problems like those. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

I am not aware of changing anyone else's posts, and if I did so, it was an accident.

I am not aware of changing anyone else's posts, and if I did so, it was an accident. It appears that the change you pointed to was the erasure of the end of a date at the end of a previous post. That might have been a glitch of some sort, but could not possibly be a meaningful or malicious change. I remember looking at a potential post I was making, and realizing I needed to go back to add a colon to indent my own reply properly, so I'm guessing that in adding the colon, a few characters got erased in the process, if it was indeed due to me. Perhaps my cursor jumped unasked? It does that. At any rate, thank you for repairing any unmeant damage. WordwizardW (talk) 21:56, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

@WordwizardW: This was your edit; notice that the last portion of the timestamp, the characters "uary 2020 (UTC)" have been removed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:00, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

I repeat, I was unaware of doing that. There could be no point in doing that on purpose. Thank you for fixing it. WordwizardW (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for closing the regen power pty ltd AfD last week - much appreciated. Bookscale (talk) 01:16, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

question re wikiproject

hi. If I have some general questions about helping or participating at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention, whom could I contact? would that be yourself? I appreciate it. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention would be a good place to start. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:05, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

... and I see that you have asked there. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't know why I have been picked out, my name is not in Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Members. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Your reverts on Morfa Mawddach railway station

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways § Morfa Mawddach railway station

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Removal of my posts

Hi RedRose64

You recently reverted three edits I made and accused me of wishful thinking. I would like to correct you on that the source was from ITVNEWS. It has been further confirmed by Andy Street. What passes as evidence to stop you making these unnecessary reverts? And also if I cant say a long term aspiration then what wording? It is hoped? It is possible?. Seems you unesscasary you reverted the edits given there pages with similar wording like the Peak Rail and Sutton Park Line pages. JoshuaGuest96 (talk) 11:06, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Are you and TarzanBoy24 (talk · contribs) (formerly named JoshuaIsTheFalco} the same person? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

And within minutes, my case was proven. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Permit to travel

Hello, Can I ask why the external link is 'not necessary'?

If you haven't visited this website, I'm not really certain why it MUST be deleted.

I would imagine that, as the page cites no sources, it would be worthwhile to at least have some form of link?

IamMattDavies (talk) 17:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

@IamMattDavies: It's covered by WP:ELNO#EL11. But what makes you think that I didn't visit the website? Does it have some form of tracking, which would itself be a breach of WP:ELNO#EL3.

Besides which, each time you attempted to add the link, you damaged something else. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Requests for closure noticeboard: procedure

Hi, do you happen to know: in Requests for closure noticeboard, for a request about a page that has been archived, should the closer do anything special to mark the close? E.g. put a note on the archived page and a new thread on the current talk page, with the same heading? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Archived threads are de facto closed by the archiving process. If it was a thread that required some kind of formal decision, it really shouldn't have been left untouched for so long that the archiving bot swooped in. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

At least that's simple. Thank you. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Tempsford and Cambourne railway stations

In the unlikely event that you have nothing better to do with your time, would you glance at the speculative service tables I've added to Cambourne and Tempsford to see if I have managed to stay on the right side of WP:OR? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:29, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

You refer, I presume, to content like this. We shouldn't offer unsourced opinions, that's against WP:NPOV and WP:V besides WP:NOR. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but I'm confused as to why you consider it an unsourced opinion, or indeed opinion full stop? See https://eastwestrail.co.uk/the-project/central-section, particularly The Preferred Route Option Report (PDF - 5MB). (Actually I should have said that my concern was about wp:CRYSTAL rather than OR as I don't believe I have done any OR). Of course I wouldn't have sought your opinion if I didn't think I might be stepping close to the line, if not actually over it. But I recognise your expertise in this subject so if you consider that I have crossed the line, I am content to be reverted. Thank you for the peer review.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I have removed my service tables pending more definite EWR/NWR decisions about these two stations (and Cambridge South). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:25, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Apologies

Having just made a comment on the undue weight of class 86 on Lancashire Witch I did notice you has just improved it. WP:TROUT me for that it wasn't intentional. Just so as you are aware where I'm coming from on this I've come over to the Liverpool and Manchester and in bits of background for the Dublin and Kingstown railway and occasionally looking at related articles when the're not up to scratch ... probably Henry Booth in particular and articles that he touches ... notably Rocket and Rainhill which I have typically spent my life avoiding! Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:15, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

When Classes 86 and 87 were given names from about 1980 on, many of the choices were names that had previously been borne by LMS Royal Scot 4-6-0s. About 25 of those had been renamed in the mid-1930s, and in virtually all cases of renaming, the first name was that of a historic locomotive. See LMS Royal Scot Class#Details, numbers 6125-6149. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Closure

@Redrose64:

Hope you're doing well. Regarding your undoing of my edit, I know WP:VPT isn't WP:ANI and formal closure isn't required, but on the same hand, what's the harm in closing the discussion? Just curious.

Cheers,
Doug Mehus T·C 22:24, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Disregard, unless you want to reply. I see you didn't really undo my closure, but rather just updated the way in which the "resolved" comment was formatted. No problem. Please ignore this, if you wish. Doug Mehus T·C 22:26, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@Dmehus: At boards like WP:ANI, which attract a lot of "drama", we have found that two sides in opposition can continue to pile on after the issue has been resolved, so we use tag pairs like {{atop}}/{{abot}} to discourage further mudslinging. But at boards like WP:VPT we don't want to stifle the addition of further constructive comments and advice: the issue may have been resolved, so we use {{resolved}} to indicate that people need not devote hours into investigating. But somebody may know of a better (shorter/easier/more efficient) way of fixing it, so we leave discussions open until the archiving bot ships them out - this means that should people look in the archives in a year or two, they can see several other people's experiences, what they did about it, etc. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Redrose64, that makes sense. Interestingly, I used the {{resolved}} template, but just needed to specify that parameter to have it display as you displayed it. Thanks for clarifying! Doug Mehus T·C 00:08, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

CC by A

Does that mean that everywhere I've used an Openstreetmap snip, I don't need to say "copyright Openstreetmap contributors" as I (I think!) they specify? It would certainly make them less clunky if I could delete that tag line. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: If you can click the image and so reach the file description page, and that page gives the necessary attribution, then MOS:CREDITS is met and you shouldn't need to put attribution in the caption as well. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

thanks

I had forgotten that bit of buggeration. Will fix my regex. Guy (help!) 10:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Your skills are needed

Hello R. I hope you are well. Martyrdom in Judaism showed up in the cat today. There is no protection there. The only thing I can find is this edit to the {{Antisemitism}} but its last protection expired in April of 2019. Of course it could be something else causing the problem. Any help you can provide will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 08:51, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

It was this edit where IZAK (talk · contribs) seems to have copypasted a chunk of code from The Holocaust without attribution (in contravention of WP:CWW) and also without fully understanding what they were pasting in. The lines

{{pp-protected|small=yes}}{{pp-move-indef}}{{pp-pc|small=yes}}
{{Use American English|date=November 2019}}
{{short description|Genocide of the European Jews by Nazi Germany and other groups}}
{{redirect-multi|2|Holocaust|Shoah}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2019}}

should never have been included. I don't think that {{infobox civilian attack}} is relevant either. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:06, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I am glad that you tracked it down R. Funny - I've gotten so used to finding the template at the top of the page and if there isn't one there going right to the transclusions I hadn't thought to look further down in the article. Many thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 10:05, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk page errors Comment

Hello, just so you know almost all of my project banners that are put on talk pages are done so through an automated process, as such there's no way for me to "preview" my edits. Also, all the projects are listed as part of a pre-populated list, they're not manually put in. Most AfC people including myself aren't going to fully know what project pages are active or not as we deal with a myriad of different subjects daily. If you see errors with how the project pages are getting posted and/or errors with projects that are pre-populated in the AfC script, you might want to make a note of it at the projects talk page. Cheers. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sulfurboy: Please do not blame the script: by making the edit, you are accepting responsibility for its consequences. As it says at WP:AFCH#What can I do using AFCH?, After performing any of these actions, the page will reload in place, allowing you to inspect your changes. Diff links are available for each edit the script made automatically. This means that you had the opportunity to revert or otherwise correct your edits.

If there are problems with any script that you use, and you are unable to fix them directly, you should contact the script's maintainers. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:33, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

It's all your fault :)

Recently you said that indenting references was bad. I didn't see that documented anywhere so I did some testing and updated Template:Reflist/doc, Template talk:Reflist, and some related pages. Hopefully this will make this kind of error less common and will give people someplace to point to when an editor trips over the bug and doesn't understand why things look funny as a result.

Anyway, "it's all your fault," or, to put it another way, you inspired me to improve Wikipedia.

Oh, and thanks for changing # to *. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:17, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

The problem that has come up twice recently at VPT is not a new one, over the last few years I have fixed several such cases, and some of them are mentioned in the VPT archives. A number of templates that are basically a block element (whether a div, list or table) will break a page if placed inside a list. Colon-indenting makes an association list; the {{reflist}} template makes an ordered list inside a div. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I the edit that inspired me: Never put a reflist inside a list. For any talk-page stalkers you might have, Template talk:Reflist#Detailed example of problem with indenting references, using Template:reflist has more technical information on what happens when you indent {{reflist}}. By the way, I assume by ordered list, you mean HTML_element#Lists. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Say, you wouldn't happen to have a bug number on this? The closest thing I could find was T148701, "Automatic references list after page-terminal ordered or bullet list generates unbalanced HTML". It seems like it might be related but it's not identical. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:46, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Removing talkheader

I see that when you remove the invalid stations-importance parameter, you're also removing {{talkheader}}. What's the reasoning behind that? It's a useful template to have on every talk page. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:47, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535: It is definitely not a "useful template to have on every talk page" - if we wanted to do that, we could easily do so by software means, such as an editnotice. Then there is the advice at, for example, Template:Talk header: This template should be used only when needed. There is no need to add this template to every talk page. and at WP:TPG#Creating talk pages: ... should not be added to pages that do not have discussions on them. There is no need to add discussion warning templates to every talk page, or even to every talk page that contains a discussion..

There is discussion on this matter at WT:TPL#Template:Talk header. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 01:09, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

That's strange, and I disagree with that (especially since WikiProject banners are allowed on otherwise empty talk pages), but clearly you're following consensus. Thank for the detailed explanation. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:37, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

A WikiProject banner will add a talk page to one or more categories, such as Category:C-Class Stations articles. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:41, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

LGBT Mennonite people

The reason it was empty is that the creator immediately renamed it to Category:LGBT Mennonites and refiled everybody in it to that other category instead. So it wasn't necessary to hold off for seven days, because it was just as deletable under either C2 ("speedy renaming") or G7 ("content blanked or erased by creator"). Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Short descriptions

Adding the short description template marks a page as having been reviewed so that it no longer turns up in TODO lists. A value of "none" shows that no SD text is really appropriate. As far as I could see, the page title was enough, but if you can think of suitable SD text then please add it. GhostInTheMachine (talk) 23:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@GhostInTheMachine: Per Template:Short description#Template information: If the article title alone is sufficient to ensure reliable identification of the desired article, a null value of {{Short description|none}} may be used. However, this will not override the descriptions from Wikidata. The whole point about adding local short descs is to override those Wikidata ones, which may be unreliable, and are definitely prone to vandalism. See for example Wikipedia talk:Short description/Archive 5#Null value, or ask RexxS (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

OK. So adding a value of "none" does follow the advice and the bug is that a local SD of "none" should override the Wikidata value just like any other local value. How do we address that? GhostInTheMachine (talk) 00:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

It's not a bug. After requests to allow the template to be added without setting the short description, I settled on the word "none" to produce that effect. The template is deliberately coded so that the word "none" is the sole exception, so that we had a mechanism that didn't set the short description, but alerted editors that a short description wasn't needed. There is no way to override the Wikidata value without actually setting a short description, because there has to be a short description: not having one isn't an option. Nevertheless, you could use any word or phrase other than "none", if you wanted to set the short description to that word or phrase, for whatever reason you feel you needed to. Even the word "None" would do the trick for you, although that would be a really bad short description. --RexxS (talk) 04:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Display issue with template

{{Closed stations Kent}} is not displaying the Ashford to Ramsgate line in "other lines" at the bottom of the template. Can't see anything obvious that is causing this. Any ideas? Mjroots (talk) 21:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@Mjroots: Has this edit by Trappist the monk (talk · contribs) fixed it? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it has. Needs a small tweak to avoid page stretch but I can do that myself. Mjroots (talk) 05:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

William Hartnell

Nobody's saying he was a bad person, or definitely a racist, or anything like that - I have a great deal admiration for Hartnell, but it still just isn't right for the Wikipedia article to delete information this way, especially since Jessica Carney (Hartnell’s granddaughter) acknowledged it. And as it is now trending through on Twitter (via Claudia Boleyn), it needs to be addressed before the media takes hold it and a big debate arrives on the Internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.227.38 (talk) 23:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

What does Twitter have to do with anything? They are in no way a reliable source. Twitter carries updates on Stephen Fry's breakfast: we don't. So just because they cover some made-up disinformation does not mean that we should. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

John Wayne's alleged racist comments, led to a heated Twitter debate after going viral there, and led to it being more known by people in the media and public and more controversy surrounding him then it had been in his interview in 1971. If it can happen to Wayne, it can happen to another celebrity from that era. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.227.38 (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Of course misinformation can be spread on social media, and false rumours can take on a life of their own when the media in which they are published makes no attempt to check facts. Fortunately Wikipedia requires reliable sources for its content, and it is telling that many large internet companies are working on ways of using Wikipedia's strength in rejecting spurious rumour-mongering as a means to combat the spread of misinformation on their own platforms. You might as well face it: Wikipedia won't be sourcing its content to Twitter and the like, ever. --RexxS (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Some Twitter accounts are considered acceptable sources in certain situations. I doubt this applies here though. Last time I checked, some tweets were cited on the biography of this well-known twitter user. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:22, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Any self-published source might be considered a usable source, including Twitter, but only for a carefully circumscribed set of exceptions to the general rule, outlined at WP:SPS. I don't believe that any of the Twitter users are published experts on William Hartnell, nor that any of them are William Hartnell (died 1975), so that removes all of the exceptions. An exception certainly does not apply here. --RexxS (talk) 01:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Allegations of anti-Semitism and racism came from co stars that worked with Hartnell like Nicholas Courtney and Anneke Wills - they're not smears. Even if the Hartnell allegations are considered not noteworthy enough, we should still take into consideration the first hand sources surrounding them and debate on whether they are notable enough. 79.69.227.38 (talk) 09:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I have taken it to the talk page to see if we can reach a consensus on this matter. [Talk:William_Hartnell#Alleged_racism]] 79.69.227.38 (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Timestamp fix

Thanks for fixing the timestamps. They were subtle and got away from me, which makes it even more important that they be fixed.

I'm assuming the IP editor is new and he just copied and pasted previous comments from other people's talk pages and put them on my talk page. WP:AGF and all. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I did. This was before I was informed I can use the ping or reply-to template. I was just trying to get people's attention to the issue at hand. I am sorry for faking the timestamps and I apologise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.227.38 (talk) 21:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

You should sign your posts using four tildes, thus: ~~~~ --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:33, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

comment from Sotuman

I left a comment on RexxS's page in reply to your comment. Since he removed it, I'm not sure whether you were notified and apologize beforehand if you already were. Thank-you note You the man(converse) 20:17, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

RexxS is permitted to remove posts from his own talk page if he so desires, see WP:OWNTALK. In any case, I did read your most recent post there (and also the attempts to reformat it), since I've been watching that page for several years. I was also notified by this edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean by "newlines"?

I'm a new XFDcloser user. I'm still learning. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 15:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@NASCARfan0548: See newline. This was your edit: previously, each parameter was on a separate line; but you ran them all together onto one line, which made it very difficult to determine exactly what you added. All you needed to to was add the parameters for the new entry at the bottom, like this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Help tracking a new one down

Hello R. I hope you are well. The recently created Help:Introduction to/All has shown up in the cat. I've been through all of the pages (I hope but still may have missed one or more) transcluded to it and added noinclude templates to those that didn't already have them. Did I miss one or is there some other item that I missed? Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 17:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Fixed, with these two edits. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I was afraid I might have missed some. I got a little bleary eyed working my way through them. I do appreciate the clean up on aisle "introduction to all" :-) Stay safe R. MarnetteD|Talk 21:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

You've been editing Wikipedia for a few days short of fifteen years, yet in one day you've more than doubled the number of edits that you've ever made in Help: namespace. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Ah memory lane time - a couple of those old ones were trying to acknowledge that the ping system had undergone a big change. Cheers MarnetteD|Talk 21:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

If I update sandbox, can I re-request?

Hello, I saw that my request for editing the period color template was denied. I'm not upset with you or anything, and I'm going to do what you said, but when I do that, do I make a new edit request, or do I edit the request I sent previously? I want to make sure I'm doing this right. Thank you! Benniboi01 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I've changed the template's sandbox to include my requested change. Can I make one addition to the request, if you're willing to carry it out? the 'middle pleistocene' has since Jan 2020 had a new, official name: the Chibanian. I was wondering if that could be added too, in this format:

|pleistocene=rgb(254,239,184)
    |upper pleistocene|tarantian=rgb(254,241,214)
    |middle pleistocene|ionian|chibanian=rgb(254,240,204)
    ...

I've already added the proposed addition above to the sandbox, as well. this section of the code would be right underneath the area I want my other code added. also, I can confirm that the rgb value for the new ages in the Holocene is (255,245,243) for all 3. thank you so much! Benniboi01 (talk) 19:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

To reactivate the request, just change |answered=yes to |answered=no. Also, please don't suggest additional template changes here - they belong on the template talk page. Not only do they deserve a more appropriate audience but it is bad practice to fragment an ongoing discussion across multiple pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you again! Benniboi01 (talk) 01:07, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Removal of information

Hello there, you removed my edit on the status of MK1 BG coach No.80590. I can confirm what I wrote was correct information backed up by visits to the TUGS Exhibition and photographic evidence of 80590 being used for their display, as that has been its purpose on the railway for the past six years. It is no longer a stores vehicle, hence why I was updating it. Please can you explain why you removed it? --Bashed3g (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bashed3g: You refer, I presume, to this edit - you didn't cite a reliable source, per the policy on verifiability. It also seemed to be promotional, which is against the policy on neutrality. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Redrose64: My apologies if it seemed promotional. I think my recent edit has made it more factual. But if you need to see reliable sources, check out here: https://www.midlandrailway-butterley.co.uk/event/star-tugs-exhibition-event-copy-2-copy-copy-2-copy/ And here from the TUGS Exhibiton site themselves talking about how they were renovating 80590 to use as their display: https://seansi3d.wixsite.com/thestartugs/exhibition And about how 80590 changed from green to maroon red: https://www.facebook.com/TugsTheExhibition/photos/a.318950308247480/1393455240796976/?type=3&theater And on the Midland Railway-Butterley website, there is a link to the exhibition on the map where 80590 stands at Butterley yard: https://www.midlandrailway-butterley.co.uk/find-us/ I also have my own photographs of the coach used as the exhibition so if you would like to see them, drop me a message. (It may take me a while to figure how to upload them on here as I am new to Wikipedia). Cheers! --Bashed3g (talk) 11:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

In order to satisfy WP:V, you need to cite your sources in the article, not here. But please take heed of both WP:PSTS and WP:SPS. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Okay. Thank you for this discussion. --Bashed3g (talk) 16:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking for missing full citation: Jowett 2000

You have the right combination of rail knowledge and technical understanding for this question. It appears that there are somewhere around 100 articles that have a short citation attempting to link to "Jowett 2000", but which are missing a full citation. See Brigham railway station as an example. Many of those articles list {{Jowett-Atlas}}, a 1989 book, in their sources; I do not think that is a coincidence. Do you have any idea what might be going on here and how the problem might best be fixed? I'm happy to edit the articles and/or the template if you have a solution. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Not personally. Lamberhurst (talk · contribs) may have a copy; or you could post at WT:UKRAIL. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I think I may have found it at {{Jowett-Nationalised}}. That full citation is missing from many affected articles. I'll have to dig into the history; I wouldn't be surprised if a single editor copy-pasted the same short citation to multiple articles without the accompanying full citation. That happens. Thanks for the response. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

PEP diagrams

I'm completely lost here. I went back and re-thought how I could display my diagrams on the page without compromising other people's work, and now you're telling me to just bugger off? I should have every right to share my work on a website that is community driven, especially if it's providing more accurate references for digital work, which it is. And if sharing my 507 diagrams is an issue, why isn't it an issue for the 313? Or the 314? Or the 315? Or literally anyone else who has posted UK train diagrams to Wikipedia? PennCentral9 (talk) 08:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Where, exactly, did I tell you to "just bugger off"? Provide diffs please. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:45, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

That was an exaggeration. You did, however, tell me to stop "plastering my things all over the place." PennCentral9 (talk) 10:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

You have persistently re-added images that others have agreed are inappropriate; and in doing so, you broke the list and so violated WP:LISTGAP, thus causing an accessibility issue. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

You can blame the LISTGAP thing on me as I'm new to Wikipedia and prefer using the visual editor, but how are the 507/508 diagrams inappropriate? Furthermore, what about every other train diagram on Wikipedia? Nobody even said that straight-forward until now. PennCentral9 (talk) 22:50, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

A train livery is more appropriately illustrated (and described) at the article for the train operating company, we don't need to clog up the individual class articles with what amounts to repetition, particularly since these 40-year-old units have worn many liveries down the years. See Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts: Don't use images or galleries excessively; see also WP:OTHERCONTENT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:10, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

That makes sense, but I really think I should have been told this to boot. PennCentral9 (talk) 14:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)