Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, I think we have addressed all of the issues from review now apart from the dead reference. Also may be the sentence before it which has a "due to be" in it which I cannot seem to find out when this is to take place. May be worth a try for GA now, any thoughts? Keith D (talk) 13:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
The review was done late today and I will not have time to do anything about it before I go away tomorrow. I have left a note on the reviewers talk page to see if they can hold off failing it. The only point to address is the tramway section which may be just a remove and add the link to the article somewhere else. Keith D (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Good news that this was passed while I was away, thanks for keeping an eye on it. Sorry for protecting my talk page I hit the wrong box should have only been move protection not edit protection. Keith D (talk) 00:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Any chance of writing something for the newsletter as I probably will not get the chance as I am away from Friday next week. I have started the page with the basic bits. Keith D (talk) 13:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hi, just to let you know that I have located an archive of the Hull Daily Mail articles, thanks to the Grimsby Telegraph site which is by the same organisation. May be this will remove some of the dead links that we have around the various East Riding of Yorkshire & Kingston upon Hull articles. If you are interested then see here. Keith D (talk) 18:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
On the roller coaster, I saw an almost identical claim being removed as per this diff earlier today. The user adding it was an IP with only a single edit, I was thinking it may be the same person - still 3 days of watchlist to go! Keith D (talk) 21:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Seems like the anon editor is a silly blogger. Cottingham doesn't even have a 'Festival Garden', see here:- Village street map, never mind a roller coaster ;), though they did hold a large music festival spread around the village in May 2008. As for the Lincoln university claim I reckon the closest you will get to that is paragraph three on this website page:- Lincoln University. :0) Richard Harvey (talk) 07:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hi Just spotted the last round of editing. Between us we seem to be getting there, despite the unhelpful anon editors, but I would still like to see the title moved to a more descriptive one. Mostly to indicate it is an economic partnership, as opposed to a merger of the various cities and borough's in the region as a single Unitary Authority. Perhaps this time we could try it with 'Partnership' added to the end. ;) Richard Harvey (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
While looking at the Yorkshire and Humber article I spotted the red link for Kingston upon Hull Urban Area with a slightly larger population that Kingston upon Hull. Any idea what this is and what extra bit it includes? My guess it will be Cottingham. May be we should have a stub to show what it is or some better referencing in the Yorkshire and Humber article to cover the statistics as I could not locate it in the reference following the table. Keith D (talk) 21:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Thank you so much for the note. Sorry about the slow reply - I've been away. I am very flattered by your kind comments but really I just wibble around on the fringes of those subjects a bit. I used to live up there (and loved it) but am far from knowledgeable. However, I will certainly have a look at the article and see if I can offer it any help. Best wishes DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 14:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much for the message. I'm glad you liked the work I was involved in on the revision. I'll try to keep a benign eye on it from a safe distance. As you said before, the previous work was clearly in good faith and I hope they'll continue to contribute. Enjoy your break, cheers, DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 23:38, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Just wondered if you would have a look at my musings on the discussion at WP:ENGLAND on getting experience distributed around so others can get articles improved up to GA/FA. I was thinking of putting it up as an aunt Sally just to get others thinking but wanted another opinion before making a fool of myself. May be it is rubbish but would be interested in knowing that now. Keith D (talk) 23:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 6113 last month to 6344 on May 30th). We have recently overtaken WP:LONDON which has 6283 articles. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 38 out of a total number of 1850 articles. In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 42 is just behind WP:GM with 44.
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status
To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive
To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members
Browsers
According to the article Usage share of web browsers the percentage of people using the Mozilla Firefox browser has increased steadily since 2004 and it now stands at 22.56%. The percentage of Wikipedia editors using Firefox is probably considerably higher because the Firefox browser has a number of advantages for editors. Not least of these is the add-on that lets you right click on a web page to get a Cite Web pop up on the menu. WPCITE allows you easily to create a citation template. This makes the laborious task of filling in web citation templates (almost) a thing of the past.
Another advantage of Firefox is the ability to use wikiEd which is a full-featured Wikipedia-integrated text editor that adds enhanced text processing functions to edit pages. And there is a spell checker Currently, wikEd works under Firefox, SeaMonkey, Safari, and Google Chrome, but not under Internet Explorer and Opera.
Mention of these other browsers reminds me that not all browsers render pages in the same way. What appears to be a beautiful layout in one browser can be rendered as a tangled mess of text and images by another. As most browsers can be downloaded for free, it is worth having several on your computer just to check the appearance of articles. Bear in mind that many people who use Wikipedia just for reference will have only Internet Explorer, and possibly quite an old version, so some of the latest "bells and whistles" may not work for them.
My apologies to old hands who already know all this, but to new users it really is worthwhile looking into the possibilities of different browsers on Wikipedia.
September 2011, web browser usage share. Source: Median values from summary table.
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis. The latest listing was created on March 9th.
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox.
As of 30 May, 2009, we have assessed 100% of all articles with a project banner.
(Some new and additional article talk pages may still require a banner however)
Thanks
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Delivered June 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Harkey Lodger. Thank you for choosing me for your newsletter deliveries for WikiProject Yorkshire. I have just completed my job for June 2009. If you have any queries, feel free to let my bot operator know. It may be of your interest to watchlist or bookmark your request page - I post updates on my jobs here. Thanks again! ENewsBot00:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, as you are up in the area there is a couple of problems that you may be able to find details for. Firstly the North Yorkshire council elections. The county council web site goes into great detail but there is no summary information and the BBC web site does not appear to give details of the votes case etc. to complete the summary box. Do you know anywhere that the summary information can be sourced from? Secondly there is a problem over the location of RAF Fylingdales. There is conflicting information on Fylingdales indicating it is in the parish and another note, that I have just relocated, indicating it is not. I have left a note on the talk page but just thought that you may have sonething that will sort out the problem. Keith D (talk) 12:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Harkey
I see you moved see also for York to the bottom. It is Wikipedia policy to have see also before references and external links always at the bottom.--Charles (talk) 16:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Not sure what you are looking for but here is a review of it without validating the references -
See also section is for internal wikilinks only se all entries need moving to external links section.
The lead is rather top heavy on history and thin on other detail as it is supposed to summarise the whole article.
Population figures are not explained/referenced apart from in another wiki article
Population figures appear in lead and not in rest of text. All facts in lead should appear somewhere in article.
Nickname "Old Duke" not referenced
Governance - Parliamentary constituencies does not indicate which MP in infobox ties in with which constituency & what is the political completion of the areas. Think this is lacking in Kingston upon Hull article, Manchester covers it in a sub-article.
In lead the bit about The province of York does not indicate we are talking C of E.
AD mostly appears before the date but in date range appears after date should be consistent throughout.
Images in Toponymy, Modern history & Gastronomy need moving as per MOS:IMAGES no left aligned images following three or lower level headings.
The paragraph "Jorvik was gradually ..."" does not make sense. We get to Yarke in the 17th century then somehow go back in time to 13th century when we are at York.
An older, and no longer accepted, theory ..." by who and unreferenced
"The first Minster church was built in York for the baptism of Edwin in 627." is unreferenced.
Post conquest, first paragraph says "either side of the river" which river Ouse or Foss?
Post conquest, second paragraph is unreferenced
In Tudor and Stuart York the word barbican probably need explaining or a link given.
In modern history the dates of establishment of the National Railway Museum and opening of the University of York are unreferenced.
The Areas of York main article appears to be misplaced should in be under Geography?
In Geography the images are causing the edit links to bunch need to fix-up see WP:BUNCH.
Population table may need splitting as needs left right scrolling, may be my window size.
Religion are you sure of the detail here, picking 1 are random Quakers having 3 meeting houses. Looks like at least 4 from the reference. Though it is dependant on if we are talking York or City of York here.
The Buddhist claim is very woolly and are we talking York or City of York for around York.
Economy - first 2 sentences unreferenced.
Reference 59 is marked as a dead link
CPP needs a link, may be one for Virgin Galactic as well.
Transport is confusing to me depending on if we are talking York or City of York
In Transport Leeds Bradford Airport appears both hyphenated & unhyphenated which is it?
Transport last paragraph is confusing knowing which is an operator and which is a destination.
Education - the number of schools does not add up 55 mentioned but 40 + 11 get me to 51. Is the merged one counted as 1 or 2 in the figures?
Public services - should the link to Selby be to the town or district article?
Fire & rescue is the grammar right there - should it be "headquarters is at Northallerton"?
Most of Theatre and the Music sections are unreferenced.
Gastronomy last sentence needs combining in with paragraph somehow.
Sport - "York Wasps one of oldest rugby league clubs" cries out for a reference. Other bits of the section need references.
Noted York people - do we need both entries as one redirects to the other?
Navbox for Hanseatic League present but no mention of why in the text.
Some of the references need italics for titles on books.
Hopefully it is not too bad but attempting to do it as though I know nothing about the subject. May be I will take cover now. Keith D (talk) 00:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Looks like you have addressed my thoughts from read through. May be we should have an outside view with a formal peer review of the article before a stab at GA. Someone who does not know the place may spot things that I may overlook. A possible problem may be the gallery, if it stays could do with filling in the last row with another image. Take a look at WP:IG to see if it fits in with it. Keith D (talk) 18:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi while looking at York I remembered you were going to look at the setting section of this to clarify it. I also added photos to commons for you to use. Keith D (talk) 00:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, I was doing the North Yorkshire Council elections but have had to do the gains/losses from the 2005 election as have no detail of who held the seats prior to the election. This means that the changes reported by the BBC do not stack-up. Do you know anywhere I can find the party that held each of the seats prior to the election. I assume that there was a number of by-elections between 2005 and 2009 that would account for the problems. Keith D (talk) 00:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Do you fancy a revisit of this? I have just realised that reference 5 which is used a number of times just gives the index page and not the actual page that the information is given on. Really it needs to be modified and split to show the actual page that the detail is on. Keith D (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, just to let you know I will be away from tomorrow for a fortnight so can you keep an eye on things. I think the newsletter is ready for delivery but may need an update if something happens before the end of the month. Main article needing work is Ilkley which was put on hold for GA review yesterday. The main problem identified so far is referencing, though the reviewer is sill in review mode and has not completed fully yet. I have added some references but not enough as yet. If you fancy making some stubs then I have got List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Humberside nearly up to Featured List status, just needs the designation ticks adding and some tidy of the sizes, but with all the red links it will not get any where. The PDF files at the end of the article could be used as the basis for a stub for each location, though they may already exist under a different name. I know some of the sites are in Lincolnshire but would be good to get another FL, the 3 other lists could be done at some point though I think the South Yorkshire one is nearly ready for FL as well. Keith D (talk) 17:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 6344 last month to 6538 on June 28th). We have recently overtaken WP:LONDON which has 6318 articles. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 39 out of a total number of 1862 articles. In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 45 is just ahead of WP:GM who have 44.
Thank you and well done to all those who contributed.
Article Activity
Siward Barn was promoted to GA on May 10th Oslac of York was promoted to GA on May 18th Thomas Ferens was promoted to GA on June 6th Wilfred was promoted to FA on June 9th Ilkley was nominated for GA on June 11th Sheffield was nominated for a FAR on June 18th Peak District was nominated for GA on June 18th York was submitted for a peer review on June 21st
Member News
There are now 64 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the new members that have joined us since the June newsletter:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status
To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive
To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members
Citing sources for your text
In recent months some really promising Yorkshire articles from new editors have been appearing on Wikipedia. These editors have worked hard to produce interesting and informative texts with some exquisite images. However, some of these articles have lacked any verifiable sources, an absolute must for Wikipedia articles. Additional research is usually necessary to write a good article. An article has to be verifiable and citereliable sources which ideally should include books or peer reviewed journal articles. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.
Fortunately, Wikipedia provides a number of easily used tools to help with this task. Beside the Firefox add on that was mentioned last month there are a couple of toolbar options to help editors.
The first is on the default toolbar. It's the <ref>...</ref> button. This places any text that is placed between the markers in the References section on the article page.
The second handy tool is obtained by going to the my preferences section on the menu tabs at the top of the page, click GADGETS, go to Editing gadgets and check refTools. Save your options and a new CITE button is added to your editing toolbar. This little wonder, when clicked, produces options for citation templates beneath the existing toolbar. It is a fairly simple task then to copy and paste the information into the template and when you've completed as much as you can, click the Add citation button. This produces an inline citation. Of course this all depends on there being a References section on the page with either the <references/> markup or {{Reflist}} template added.
If you are in doubt about an unsourced statement, try copying the phrase or sentence and pasting it into the search box of your favourite search engine. Often this turns up a source which you can then add to the article yourself by filling in one of the citation templates on your editing toolbar. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider tagging a sentence by adding the {{fact}} template, a section with {{unreferencedsection}}, or the article with {{refimprove}} or {{unreferenced}}. Alternatively, you may leave a note on the talk page requesting a source, or you may move the material to the talk page.
Please remember...
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis. The latest listing was created on June 18th. Here is an extract
The project has 15 top-importance articles. 8 of them, or 53.3%, are flagged for cleanup.
Articles with dead external links (Oct 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Mar 2009)
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox.
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Delivered July 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, if you are looking for something to do on York then reference 82 does not appear to support text in either of its usages. Needs investigating. Keith D (talk) 11:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for helping with referencing - can you dig out one for the Media section "URY voted BBC Radio 1 Student Radio Station of the Year 2005" not covered by the reference which just covers the first part of the sentence. Keith D (talk) 22:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I was thinking of going for East Riding of Yorkshire as a follow on from York and then probably North Yorkshire how does that sound? I started by looking at the wapentake bits and sorted out some confusion and the red-links by creating the stubs and getting all of the links pointing at the right place on all their usages. Keith D (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Sounds OK to me. Non-controversial. Nice and peaceful. (Hope these are not famous last words on the subject !!) I think the Victoria County History Online volumes are quite complete for both of them. And,both the county authorities have goodish websites.--Harkey (talk) 17:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Certainly quiet, I am steering clear of the controversial West Yorkshire articles as there are several editors over there. May be can get some ideas from Dorset and Somerset which are FA articles for counties. We can probably use some of the material for the Yorkshire articles. I have also started the newsletter if you want to drop something in there. Keith D (talk) 22:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 6,538 last month to 6,651 on July 27th). WP:LONDON have had a major tagging spree by a bot and now have 12,595 articles which is twice as may as this project. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 39 out of a total number of 1,946 articles. In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 46 is just ahead of WP:GM who have 45.
Thank you and well done to all those who contributed.
Article Activity
Peak District passed a GA review on July 2nd Ilkley failed a GA review on July 19th Arctic Monkeys kept following GAR reassessment on July 21st York nominated for GA review on July 21st Geoffrey Boycott nominated for GA review on July 25th
Member News
There are now 65 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the new members that have joined us since the July newsletter:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status
To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive
To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members
Images
This month we focus on a recent requirement for images in articles—that of supplying alternative text for each of the images. This has been raised in FAC debates and is now a requirement for FA articles and as a result there is a general push to get all images marked-up. For example the {{Infobox UK place}} is currently undergoing changes in preparation for the use of alternative text on its images.
Alternative text is text added to the image mark-up to describe the image to someone who cannot see the image. The alternative text is in addition to the caption and should not duplicate information in the caption. It should be added, without any wikimark-up or line-breaks in it, using the alt= parameter of the image mark-up. For more information on this see WP:ALT.
Example
The exterior of York Castle, including a large portion of the motte.
[[Image:York castle exterior.jpg|thumb|100px|alt=A tall, circular, roofless building of honey coloured stone positioned on top of a high mound of grass.|The exterior of York Castle, including a large portion of the motte.]]
(If you are using a standard graphical browser and want to read this image's alt text, ask the browser to display the image's properties. Usually right click, properties.)
The same requirement is to be applied to Math-mode formulas but is probably less important to this project as very few of our articles contain such mark-up.
Please remember...
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis. The latest listing was created on June 18th.
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox.
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
As you are good at locating references - can you come up with one for the 1994 EU time-share directive. I can find several mentioning changes to it but cannot pinpoint any reference for the original. Keith D (talk) 12:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, can you do me a favour and have a look over this before I put it live to replace the present version. I think I have got it into a non-POV state now. Keith D (talk) 18:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
I've had a quick look just now. You have certainly made a good job of getting the POVs out of the way. I'll have another look at the text in the morning. Can't get my head around all the European parties and factions and committees etc. at the moment!!--Harkey (talk) 20:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks - I had never heard of the chap when I started so most of it was existing text or from the references. I will wait to put live another day will not matter, may give time for things to cool down. Keith D (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Can you check out the change to the economy section, probably will have to revert out as not matching reference but the extra reference may have some detail but it is timing out so I cannot check the detail. I have replied on talk page to user about my previous revert. Keith D (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File Copyright problem
Thank you for uploading File:Revised Boundaries of East Yorkshire.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters, WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 11,461 last month to 11,606 on October 25th). In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 112 is ahead of WP:GM who have 83. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 57 out of a total number of 3,422 articles.
Currently we have thirty three Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Sheffield Editathon 22 November 2014
There will be an editathon on Saturday 22 November in Sheffield, the theme is historical authors and printers from the Yorkshire region. Project members would be very welcome either to join them on the day or make suggestions on the project page.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The November 2014 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no further suggestions from the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Delivered November 2014 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters, WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (11,606 last month). In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 112 is ahead of WP:GM who have 83. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 57 out of a total number of 3,422 articles.
Currently we have thirty three Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Happy Christmas
It is that time of year again and time to wish all project members a Happy Christmas.
Article counts
The observant will spot that the article figures are unchanged since the last newsletter as the BOT is not updating the tables at the moment and the manual update is not accessible. Hopefully it will be back in operation for the New Year edition of the newsletter.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The December 2014 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no further suggestions from the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Delivered December 2014 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters, WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 11,606 in November to 11,657 on January 6th). In the area of GAs WP:YORKS at 112 is ahead of WP:GM who have 83. WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 57 out of a total number of 3,450 articles.
Currently we have thirty three Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Happy New Year
It is another year and time to wish all project members a Happy New Year.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The January 2015 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no further suggestions from the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Delivered January 2015 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
: 18 May 2009
--Harkey (talk) 18:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
Fixed--Harkey (talk) 07:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Created new archive page
