I miss the "Orange Bar of Death" notifying me when I had a new talk page message.

Please add new comments at the bottom of the relevant section if it already exists - e.g. Railways, Places, Ships, Aircraft & Airlines etc. Please add new subjects to the bottom of the relevant section; If you are unsure where to add your contribution, the "New messages" section at the bottom of the page will be fine. I'll move it myself if necessary.

Please note: I do not watch article talk pages. If you wish to raise an issue, please drop me a note here.

If your post is an Admin-related matter, please post it in the Admin section on this page. If you e-mail me, please leave a note in the "New Messages" section of my talk page so that I am aware one has been sent.

BarnstarsEdit

  • For barnstars I've been awarded, see here
  • If you feel that I deserve a barnstar, please add it here.
  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for all the shipwreck info! Dibbydib (talk) 08:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
  The Current Events Barnstar
message I wanted to reach out and thank you for your hard work on keeping the Stonehaven derailment article up-to-date and factual. This is the first major article that I have made, and it has been good to see editors such as yourself work hard to help record the facts of such a tragic incident. Thank you. AimeeSunflower (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK & ITNEdit

 This user has written or expanded 233 articles featured in the Did You Know section on the Main Page.




My DYKs are on this sub-page and my ITNs are on this sub-page. Earlier discussions are archived here

  The 25 DYK Medal
For achieving your 25th Did You Know? I hereby award you this big fat medal. Well done. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  The 50 DYK Medal
Trams, mills, railways ... I think Isambard would have been proud of your approach particulary the French ideas, but he would have barred our veteran editor from further progression for supporting a railway that was merely a metre. But he's not here! So more seriously, thank you on behalf of the wiki. (Let me tell you though that the 100 one s a really cool yellowy gold colour). Good luck with the GA and cheers Victuallers (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
  The 100 DYK Medal  
As I told you at 50 ... the 100 DYK medal is a really cool shade of yellow. I hope you are not disappointed, as the wiki is not regretful at all of your efforts. Well done. The wiki gets better due to your contributions and its a pleasure to thank you again on behalf of the wiki. See you at 200? Victuallers (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
  The 200 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
The D.Y.K. Project thanks you for your tireless contributions. The Interior (Talk) 17:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for PS CastaliaEdit

Thank you for thanking me. I actually noticed only one of the typos, but I use Firefox and it apparently spellchecks everything by default. When I went into edit mode, not only was the error I noticed underlined with a wavy line, so were other things. I had to sort out the genuine mistakes from a lot of "false positives"; I hope I didn't change anything that was right.

You are obviously a very active contributor to Wikipedia. I am mostly a consumer -- I benefit from the work you and others like you do. Thank you very much.

I have no idea whether this is the right place for this comment. You replied to my talk page and this is your talk page, so I hope it is. If not, you will move it. Gms3591 (talk) 07:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Want to expand Peace in Africa for a DYK?Edit

Hi Mjroots, you and Haus seem to have good access to merchant marine sources. Want to expand Peace in Africa (ship) for DYK? Djembayz (talk) 11:55, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Any additions to Malahat (schooner) at DYK?Edit

Hi again! I've put in a self nom for Malahat (schooner) at DYK. Perhaps you can spruce it up a bit. Djembayz (talk) 21:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1912 Brooklands Flanders Monoplane crashEdit

  Hello! Your submission of 1912 Brooklands Flanders Monoplane crash at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Chris857 (talk) 02:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Bump. Chris857 (talk) 03:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/De AkkermolenEdit

Ping. Hope you're doing well. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nominationEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/QSMV Dominion Monarch at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wendhausen WindmillEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Wendhausen Windmill at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Eckwersheim derailment has been nominated for Did You KnowEdit

DYK nomination of Godmersham ParkEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Godmersham Park at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Elisa.rolle (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

  Hello! Your submission of Godmersham Park at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 20:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

AdminEdit

Old discussions are archived here.

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered usersEdit

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2022Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928)
  • When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirementEdit

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

  1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
  2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

AviationEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

The WikiEagle - February 2022Edit

The WikiEagle
The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter
Volume I — Issue 2
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Columns

Discuss & propose changes to The WikiEagle at The WikiEagle talk page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: ZLEA

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Recent ANI and VASP Flight 210Edit

I haven't been editing much[1] of late because I'm busy getting my next book ready for publication. So I didn't check in on the ANI till a few minutes ago and I saw you closed it. Sometime in the next few days I will make a few comments here about the ANI and that article. I promise to be polite not like I was on my talk page.

In the meantime, I'm letting you know I'm going to gut as you call it, VASP Flight 210, and I will summarize why right now.

  • Before I came upon the article, it had just two sources. But one of them is another wiki[2], and per WP:CIRCULAR this is unacceptable as a source. I removed these references from the article.
  • Now the one reference on the article, its ASN. ASN says very little about the accident and where it is used in the article as a reference it mostly says no such thing.
  • If I pare down VASP FLight 210 to just what ASN says, there isn't going to be much of an article left and I will probably send it to AFD.
  • There is another source available here[3] for this accident. But if you read what it says at the bottom of that website, 'Sources: Folha de S.Paulo, Jornal do Brasil, ASN, Wikipedia and FAB.' The reliability is therefore doubtful. It looks like somebody's personal website and these almost always fail WP:RS.

Maybe @Ahunt: and @MilborneOne: can chime in on what I wrote about the Varig article....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:58, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@WilliamJE: - your alternative source mentions the Jornal do Brasil, which presumably meets RS. May be other newspaper coverage available online, such as The Times. Mjroots (talk) 07:55, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The WikiEagle - March–April 2022Edit

The WikiEagle
The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter
Volume I — Issue 3–4
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Columns

Discuss & propose changes to The WikiEagle at The WikiEagle talk page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: ZLEA

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

The WikiEagle - May 2022Edit

The WikiEagle
The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter
Volume I — Issue 5
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Columns

Discuss & propose changes to The WikiEagle at The WikiEagle talk page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: ZLEA

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Geotags, Grid refs etc,Edit

Geo Links and GeographEdit

There are problems with your suggestion- which is the reason I haven't done it. There is a discussion forum Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates that is discussing the whole thing. The crux is that many people are unhappy if the link goes to one site, no matter how useful, and believes that the link should only go to GeoHack, where the reader can choose the map they want. There are a lot of unhappy people there. I have a problem with the way we are doing the conversion. It looks great, but if we edit either gridref or the location then the other doesn't change. In looking for a solution, I have been looking at the maths and a lot doesn't add up, this coupled with the volatility of forum, I have been hanging back. ClemRutter (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello there, and thanks for the contact. To me this looks good, but (and it is a big but) I'm afraid the issue appears more complex and contentious than I had first anticipated. I'm also not particularly "clued-up" about which system is good and which is bad, which seems to be part of an ongoing debate. All I know is that there should be a standard system, and these should be included as part of the text for settlements in the UK. Have you taken this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates? -- Jza84 · (talk) 23:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Infobox geotags- looks as it will take some time. Its on my list! ClemRutter (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Checking inline geotagsEdit

  • Now the accuracy of OStoWiki has been corrected (+/- 2m) all previous references may need tweaking.
  • The GeoHack tool now has a new interface and at the bottom of the GB section, under the dangerously inaccurate grid reference is a fantastic tool called Map of all Coordinates in article.
  • I tried it on the Loose stream, and because of it I I'm going to make another tweak to OStoWiki.

ClemRutter (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

It is perfectly safe to use: the next tweak will be an enhancementClemRutter (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

OscoorEdit

Thanks for the reminder. Although I use OS maps within multimap to find things, multimap gives DMS output, and the numbering of the OS gridlines in the display tends to be hidden; so I tend to think I'm not ever going to use {{oscoor}}. However your intervention did cause me to go back and read the national grid system article, so as to understand the resolution of various lengths of OS coordinate. As I would not have done this without your intervention; thanks! --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Problem with gbmapping and oscoor templatesEdit

Hi, There seems to be a small inaccuracy in the translation of OSGB coords to WGS84. I've mentioned it here and here but haven't found anyone who might be able to fix it. Do you know where it would be best to raise it, please?--Cavrdg (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Grid refsEdit

I did not like having to display grid refs without spaces. At long last I have got round to asking someone and doing this very simple edit. The php that it calls was already prepared to receive spaces. That means you could do this edit to other articles that call oscoor (which is now a redirect). But certainly, I suggest using {{gbmappingsmall}} in any future case. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I have now implemented oscoor elimination as a tool - see Template talk:oscoor. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

GeographEdit

Moved from my user page
Yes indeed! A terrific place for browsing old memories and old haunts as well! Thanks for the reminder. Palmeira (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, the FAQ says CC-BY-SA-2.0 but I think that should still usable. We just have to maintain attribution. LeadSongDog come howl! 03:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

MillsEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Medway watermillsEdit

Dear User:Mjroots. For what I have understand, you are a main contributor to the template page Template:Medway watermills diagram. As of now, this page is on overflow, and I am trying to empty the Category:Pages_where_template_include_size_is_exceeded. My opinion is as follows:

  1. your original page, written using {{BS-map}} could be renamed as Template:Medway watermills diagram/src.
  2. by the way, a new option, all could be added (beside upper, middle, lower), to reproduce what happens when <notinclude>1</notinclude> is set.
  3. thereafter, this page could be compiled to a new page Template:Medway watermills diagram, written using {{routemap}}. This gives a new template, with far less transclusions, and therefore more efficient when itself transcluded into some other page.
  4. And now, we can have side by side the all map and the upper+middle+lower one. And we can see that the junction middle--lower is correct, while the junction upper--middle is not optimal.

I have reproduced these steps at 2=User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram/src, 3=User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram, 4=User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram/test. Could you fix, in your template, the point .4. (see the test page), i.e. what is happening near Salman's Farm Mill ? And, moreover, what is your opinion about the whole process ? In fact, I really have no practice of these BS-map templates and I can't figure if people are really working directly with {{routemap}} or are using {{BS-map}} and then compiling. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 15:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pldx1: - I understand that there is a size issue, but I'm not sure what you mean by "what is happening near Salman's Farm Mill". I see not problem with the diagram at all. It is displaying correctly. I created the diagram line by line using the BS-map system, if that helps you. It is complete and is unlikely to need to be altered, which is a good thing. There has been talk at the Trains WikiProject recently where an alternative system was proposed which gets around the size issue at a cost of needing a degree in computing to be able to edit the diagram. Is the size issue that bad that the diagrams need to be tampered with? Mjroots (talk) 15:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@Mjroots:. Please open User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram/test and search for Yalding Mill. On the left, i.e. on the 'all' map, the next object after Yalding Mill is Wateringbury Stream. On the right, i.e. on the middle+lower map, we have Yalding Mill, a to mouth link, a to source link and then Wateringbury Stream. This behavior is what was expected. Let us now compare with the junction between upper and middle. Searching for Salman's Farm, we see that some objects, namely Ensfield Mill, Limit of navigation, Ramhurst Mill, Powder Mills, Town Lock and Town Mill, are on the left, but not on the right. This shouldn't occur, but I have no idea of how to proceed, since I know nothing about the Medway river. Concerning the other points, I will try to find the discussion your are mentioning, at Trains WikiProject. Have a good day. Pldx1 (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@Pldx1: It would appear that you are using the new system. Looks like a few lines of code have got missed out somewhere to cause that error which you describe. I see it now I know exactly what to look for.
Can't help with the fix though. Don't understand that system at all. Mjroots (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@Mjroots:. Oh no, I am not using the new system ! To tell it crudely, there are programmers, you, me, other people. They are using programming languages. Here, {{BS-map}} and the sequel. There are computers. They are using assembly language. Here {{routemap}}. Obviously some geeks are writing directly in assembly language, but most of the programmers are using a compiler, to translate from programming language into assembly language. Here, the translation is not too difficult: what should be done on the human side is described at Template:Routemap/doc#Transition_from_legacy_BS_row_template_to_Routemap_markup i.e. some substitutions that are easy to automatize. And all the rest is computer made when the subst are proceeded.

Again, Medway watermillsEdit

Hello. I have done some work about Template:Medway watermills diagram. I came here from a general concern about overflow. My interest for this specific template comes from its complexity that provides some clues about the problems to solve for compiling {{BS-map}} into {{routemap}}. May I recall that I do not consider replacing the former by the later, but organizing the coexistence of both systems, where people can write and test in their favorite language, and compile their sources at any moment of the process.

Once again, I know nothing about the Medway river, and it would be great that you control User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway/full written solution and see if my proposals for the upper, middle, and lower maps are sound. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 11:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pldx1: If I understand it correctly, the full diagram is now on the left. Looking good although there is some random bolding of names that needs addressing. I'm sure this minor problem can be overcome. As I said earlier, this diagram is very unlikely to need to be amended, apart from the names of a few mills not identified by name which may possibly become identified in the future. I see no benefit in adding roads, railways etc. It would all become far too complicated and cluttered. This is a river and mills diagram, best to keep it that way. Mjroots (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The diagram on the left comes from the actual template i.e. Template:Medway watermills diagram. The only changes were compilation (and bolding four locations near the jointures of the partial maps). On the contrary, the three maps on the right (each one below the other) are the new ones, obtained from assembling the parts and changing the visibility of block14 (at the junction of upper and middle part). This is to be compared with the previous User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway_watermills_diagram/test. What is your opinion about taking back block 18 (Eldridge Lock etc) in the middle part ? Pldx1 (talk) 12:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "taking back block 18". The only problem I can see with the right hand diagrams is that the continuation arrow on the top diagram is the wrong colour. Mjroots (talk) 13:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

List of windmills in Ille-et-VilaineEdit

Hi,

I did a correction on this list and I'm curious: why is there names in bold or in italic on List of windmills in Ille-et-Vilaine?

Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 17:04, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: Bold text denotes mill is standing, italics denotes remains only. Mjroots (talk) 17:06, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick answer. I added a note on the table to be more explicit (and if I find time, I'll probably translate this list on the French Wikipédia). Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 17:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: Thanks. There are other French windmill lists, all linked from the List of windmills in France. I gave each département a separate list once it reached 20 windmills. Mjroots (talk) 17:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Veldkamps MeulnEdit

Would you be interested in helping to expand the Veldkamps Meuln article? – Editør (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

@Editør: - done. Article needs adding to the List of Rijksmonuments in Groningen (province), but I'm not sure where it fits in. Mjroots (talk) 17:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your help so far. That list contains only seven places and is far from complete. Wouldn't it be easier to use (sub)categories for this? – Editør (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Do you maybe have a source for the storeys (total of seven storeys with a stage at the third)? Because I couldn't find anything about it in the windmill database. – Editør (talk) 21:27, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
@Editør: - Look at the photos in the article, at Commons and on the Molendatabase website. As for the list of Rijksmonuments, take a look at the List of Rijksmonuments in Friesland. That is a better laid out list. Mjroots (talk) 05:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I just don't think a list with all 2,557 rijksmonumenten in the province of Groningen will be very useful. – Editør (talk) 15:20, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
When looking at the photos I see windows at different heights, but I cannot tell whether every window indicates a separate floor in the interior. I'm pretty sure it isn't the case for the farm on this photo and that has Veldkamps Meuln in the background. – Editør (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Redbournbury MillEdit

Hi Mjroots. I have made some sizable additions to the Redbournbury Mill page as it was fairly sparse. I figured as you're an active member of WikiProject Mills it'd be polite to let you know. I would hope that I've done enough to raise it from Start class, however I don't have much in the way of knowledge of the ways Wikipedia works 'behind the scenes' - is there a way in which I can submit it for reassessment? Many thanks Mark49s (talk) 19:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mark49s: - good work there! I have fond memories of the mill, having worked on it before the fire when I had ambitions of becoming a millwright. I'll reassess it for you. Mjroots (talk) 19:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Awesome, thank you! If you ever get a chance to visit again it's well worth it. A lot of work has been carried out - and the produce they sell is top notch! Mark49s (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Westuit Nr. 7Edit

Can you give me a hand? What needs doing, you can do in half the time it takes me. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmies (talkcontribs) 17:57, 23 April 2018

@Drmies:, Have bashed it into something resembling a shape. You'll need to go through it and correct any translation errors. For future reference, User:Mjroots/sandbox2 is my windmills sandbox, currently set up for Dutch mills. Copy and replace as appropriate.   Mjroots (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Oh man--I was just hoping you'd fill out the infobox. This is awesome. Thank you so much! Drmies (talk) 21:13, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
@Drmies: you need to use {{Infobox windmill}}. Mjroots (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
I did, but realized very quickly that the terms are very specific and I wasn't quite sure about the translation--that's what I meant by saying it would take me much more time: I was thinking of the infobox parameters, which you know better than anyone since you wrote it, haha! Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 14:56, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Thelnetham Windmill on OTDEdit

I'm sorry, but the date of 25 December isn't mentioned in the Thelnetham Windmill article, so it can't be included in Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 25. In addition, I don't see a good hook for it. Currently, it's essentially "business began operation on this date" ... the issue is, what is notable about this business? Is it the UK's oldest surviving windmill? Or the most famous one? I just need something that is going to pique the readers' interest. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:26, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

@Howcheng: - "The post mill was replaced by a tower mill, which was built by millwright George Bloomfield for William Button in 1819. The mill was set to work on Christmas Day 1819.[5]" - unless Christmas Day fell other than on 25 December that year then it is covered. Nothing especially notable about the mill other than the manner of its restoration (shared with Wicken Windmill). I thought it would be a nice touch to mark the bicentenary. Not looking for the article to be a regular appearance, just this once. Maybe pencil in another appearance in 2069, but I won't be around for that one. Mjroots (talk) 18:46, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Windmills completed in 1975Edit

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Windmills completed in 1975 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. Liz Read! Talk! 16:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

GrödersbyEdit

Moin Mjroots. I see you created the list of windmills in Schleswig-Holstein. Any particular reason why the one in Grödersby is not included? It's in the german list. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 10:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@G-41614: - probably because I was unable to identify it existed at the time I created the list. I also created the de-Wiki lists with assistance from, and at the request of, a de-Wiki editor. Feel free to add any missing mills that can be verified. Mjroots (talk) 10:35, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, might do. It's not that far from me, so I might take a picture at some point as well. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 10:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
@G-41614: that would be good. No image at Commons currently. Mjroots (talk) 10:56, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Done and done - although the image isn't all that, but it's what my camera produces. Private property, so no way to get any closer. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 17:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation of links to millEdit

Given your expertise could you help disambiguate the 103 links to the disambiguation page Mill (factory) shown here?— Rod talk 11:05, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

@Rodw: - all articles done. Mjroots (talk) 17:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Thats brilliant - thank you.— Rod talk 17:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

PeopleEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Nicholas WintonEdit

Thanks for trying. Great to see such important real world news taking centre stage yet again. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi again. I was wondering if you'd had any response at wp:cz about the class of the Order of the White Lion awarded to Winton? Although I have more or less given up on the ITN nomination, I'm still intrigued. The report at PrageuPost suggests that both awards were made at the same class, but does not explicitly. I'v also scoured all of the top Google hits in Czech (with the help of Google translate!) but have drawn a blank. As User talk:Fuebaey has pointed out, we don't to seem to have any reliable sources yet for the class. One imagines that there would be a Czech Government website somewhere that would put this matter beyond doubt. Many thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh well, at least we found out it was a Class 1, the same as Churchill's. So some satisfaction. Now the ITN nomination has timed out and dropped off the queue, of course, so any difference in consensus makes no difference, I guess. Hope you are well. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Peter CazaletEdit

Nice article there. Might be worth trying to find a DYK? from it - maybe the fact about him teaching Elizabeth Taylor to ride possibly? Can you check something from his military career? Article says he was potentially recommended for a Military Medal, but I would imagine by that point Cazalet was already an office and would have been line for a Military Cross - could you have a look at your source to check it? --Bcp67 (talk) 15:07, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Source is online and states Military Medal. As for DYK, that one would work, as would Albert Roux being his personal chef. Mjroots (talk) 18:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
OK I can see what's happened with the source there, having read the online article from The Guards Magazine now - the recommendation of the MM refers to a different soldier, a Guardsman - eligible for the Military Medal. Cazalet was the soldier's CO - "Two days later at a laager on a German farm, Gdsm Cumbley’s squadron commander, Peter Cazalet, called him in and told him he would be recommended for an award, but despite a letter of recommendation to Lt Col Windsor Lewis, he was to be disappointed; there was no Military Medal". I'm going to remove the mention from the article. Agree about Albert Roux too, I might nominate this for DYK with a couple of Alt hooks. --Bcp67 (talk) 18:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
@Bcp67: - no problem, thanks. If you nominate for DYK you won't need to do a QPQ. Mjroots (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I think they've changed the rules lately and anyone nominating has to do a QPQ, it's no problem as I've done a few DYK reviews here and there. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I've done about as much as I think his cricket career warrants. I'm not sure I believe the story about him turning down the captaincy of Kent for his horse-racing interests: Percy Chapman, as an ex-England captain, was pretty well-ensconced in the job for as long as he wanted it, and Bryan Valentine, a far better cricketer than Cazalet, played fairly regularly and acted as Chapman's deputy for the times whenever the great man's conviviality got in the way of his ability to do the job, which happened more and more across the 1930s. Does the local reference give a date when this captaincy offer took place? Johnlp (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that's probably wise. It may well be that he was encouraged to make the couple of appearances for Kent in the 1932 season, as they probably remembered his 150 for them in 1928; but it didn't really work out. I'm surprised that he didn't play for Oxford at all after he was dropped in 1928, not even in the trial match for 1929: could it be that he left the university after two years and didn't finish his degree? Over to you to delve some more if you wish. Johnlp (talk) 10:36, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Joshua Claybourn for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joshua Claybourn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joshua Claybourn (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Notifying you about the discussion, since you have made significant contributions to articles related to this subject. --IndyNotes (talk) 03:52, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

RequestEdit

Hello. Help expand the article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you very much.171.248.63.149 (talk) 10:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@171.248.63.149: - Sorry, but I don't know anything about her, and the subject matter is outside my area of interest. Looks to be a decent enough article that complies with WP:BLP and demonstrates the notability of the subject. Mjroots (talk) 10:17, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of List of royal weddings for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of royal weddings is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of royal weddings until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Surtsicna (talk) 15:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Murder of Rachael RunyanEdit

Hi Can you look at Murder of Rachael Runyan and do a grammar/proofread? Your help would be appreciated. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 09:43, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Acad Ronin (talk) 12:32, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Tom Newton DunnEdit

Hi, while this has been the subject of a lot of back and forth edits, the controversy section of the page is not contentious. The subject or people on their behalf are trying to conceal something that is true and supported by citations. I do not think the content violates the wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons. It would be good to reinstate the content and keep the lock! Jpkeates (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:46, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Please could you check the Talk page now @Mjroots? We have achieved consensus and noted that the original deletion appears very likely to have been effectuated by the subject himself. This is clearly disallowed by Wikipedia rules.Innovative Username (talk) 16:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Manning (sinologist)Edit

On access to newspaper archives; yes, it's useful to know that. Although my local library closed 15 years ago, I will check out an alternative (in Surrey) about 20 minutes away. I don't begrudge the subscription. It won't be wasted because I'm an incurable geneaholic, and it also found the secondary source needed yesterday for 'Mad' Tom Manning. The DNB tells me that before travelling to Somerset he pulled his own beard out by the roots. Supplying references on Wikipedia may be less painful.

Love your articles on ships. My ancestors sailed. Have found User:Acad Ronin helpful also.

Love your articles on mills. I inherit paintings.

Regards RAClarke (talk) 17:57, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Sean LockEdit

 On 18 August 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Sean Lock, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
"It was the week Margaret Thatcher died ... and all I said... a fitting tribute to her... when they cremated her, be great if they ran out of coal": [4]. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
@Martinevans123: All the best ones get taken far too early. Mjroots (talk) 14:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
MrJ-in-Roots, you are so right, alas. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
@Martinevans123: Channel 4, tomorrow, 9pm. Mjroots (talk) 19:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks for that. Well worth watching. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

PicturesEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Copyrighted imagesEdit

Note to self

When uploading copyrighted images, remember to use {{Non-free fair use in}} and {{Fair use rationale}}.

File:N269RV.jpg listed for deletionEdit

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:N269RV.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Russavia Let's dialogue 04:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:26, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I've deleted both images. Wikipedia will be poorer without them, but it's not worth a slow edit war to keep them up. Mjroots (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Loose Valle Mills.jpgEdit

 

Thank you for uploading File:Loose Valle Mills.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

  Fixed Mjroots (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description detailsEdit

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rakaia-painting.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading File:Rakaia-painting.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

NFCEdit

Would this image meet NFC? - [5]? I want to use it in an article we have been working on. Cheers, FriyMan talk 18:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@FriyMan: There is a very good chance that an image can be used under WP:NFCC rules, if it can be shown to meet all criteria. Mjroots (talk) 18:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I will upload the image under WP:NFC. I will update the infobox. Cheers, FriyMan talk 19:09, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
@FriyMan: - done my best to argue for the retention of the file. Fingers crossed. Mjroots (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Could you help me with a WikiMedia related matterEdit

@Mjroots: I found a copyright-free image of SS Richard Montgomery in-tact on Flickr here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/135648140@N02/29712569787/in/photolist-MgAFPZ-MgAFNX-3bjAY9-msjJWT-Wu34UT-2meaP83-62XCiC-2mdDgXQ-2mdDgX9-Zx132W-2mdC9WW-2fznVGe-DhSdV-5RotDB-ee23TP-hW8STy-ee7JBY-2mdHhWN-8Mb6um-hW8UHd-MW8dtk-8xhE19-2kTDwb8-bsBZeg-2mAXCAv-2j4gyDU-2mBqEZF-2gG27BY-d4jQ2q-6rMion-N4FHnk-Wo4fmQ-2mdFUK4-MNmew1-fHiaXM-42nTc4-2mdDgWC-2mdDgWh-3bf7U4-DhScL-XUhoJW-j7xvB6-2cUFbek-bKyiBP-2mdHhXu-mYis9M-3bf7Cp-pdmuju-3bf7bi-725zc9 But, it was speedy deleted, without discussion because the image was also on VesselFinder, and because of that, the image was somehow "Copyrighted by VesselFinder" even though VesselFinder images are user-generated content, and the image was used by many news sources without copyright disclaimers. I wanna reupload the image while specifying it's on Flickr, but I'm scared that if I do, I'll be reprimanded. Could you do it for me? Thebrakeman2 (talk) 15:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Thebrakeman2: - that image is not copyright free, it states " All rights reserved " under the date of uploading. It might be possible to use the image under "fair use" rules, but as a standard Liberty ship it could well be argued that any other image on such would also be just as useful. Mjroots (talk) 17:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Ok, how would I go about doing that? Thebrakeman2 (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
@Thebrakeman2: - You need to read WP:FAIRUSE and WP:FUR. All 10 points of NFCCP need to be met. Mjroots (talk) 18:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Could you possibly help me with that? Also, which points?
@Thebrakeman2: - WP:NFCCP - all 10 points have to be met. You're going to struggle to meet point 1 I fear. Mjroots (talk) 19:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Are there that many other photos of Mongomery in-tact? Thebrakeman2 (talk) 21:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
The problem is, that as a standard Liberty ship, she looked no different to hundreds of other Liberty ships. This image conveys the same info and is usable. Mjroots (talk) 06:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

PlacesEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

QueenstownEdit

Thanks - if you could just remind me which article I did that on I can change it?— Rod talk 18:28, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

I now see you changed the dab on List of shipwrecks in April 1851. Thanks.— Rod talk 18:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
I probably did it that way because Queenstown, County Cork doesn't appear at Queenstown.— Rod talk 18:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

"Point Flinders" listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Point Flinders and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 26#Point Flinders until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. A7V2 (talk) 01:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

RailwaysEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Help in requesting a page be moved.Edit

I'm not exactly sure how to propose a page being moved, so, could I ask you, the resident "transportation admin", for help. I want to move Lee Hall station to Lee Hall Depot under WP:CommonName, as "station" is much more rarely used than "Depot", like in articles, the NRHP listing, travel sites, etc. This would be the third step in one of the multiple things I wanna do involving the page, the first and second, being category reform and making descriptions on other pages more accurate, are complete. The next step is massive page revamps, and the page is massively outdated, and undersized.

Thanks for the help, signed - 108.45.170.249 (talk) 15:35, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@108.45.170.249: I can move the article over the redirect, but is "depot" capitalized or not? You can always file a move request at WP:RM, in this case under "technical requests" as I don't think there will be much controversy with the move. Mjroots (talk) 15:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
The redirect has depot capitalized, and I'd say that most sources capitalize it, and that most "Bla Bla Station"/"PLACEHOLDER Depot" make the Station part capitalized. 108.45.170.249 (talk) 16:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
@108.45.170.249: I've moved the article for you. The lede will need rewriting to cover both titles. BTW, you don't need to use {{Re}} on someones's talk page. Mjroots (talk) 16:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the tip, and the help. Would you mind moving https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Lee_Hall_station and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q16894038 for me? Thanks - 108.45.170.249 (talk) 23:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC).
@108.45.170.249: I can't move Commons stuff. You'll have to put in a move request for that over at Commons. As for Wikidata, Tagishsimon and Pigsonthewing are the experts. Mjroots (talk) 06:15, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
@108.45.170.249 Wikidata done. Will do commons once I'm not on my mobile. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Commons now done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:00, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thank you so much @Pigsonthewing:! 108.45.170.249 (talk) 13:08, 22 May 2022 (UTC).

Proposed deletion of German trawler V 206 Otto BröhanEdit

 

The article German trawler V 206 Otto Bröhan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of any notability, just a name among many in some lists, and an entry in Lloyd's which doesn't indicate any notability. No actual reliable, indepth sources about this ship apparently. Perhaps there is a good redirect target?

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 10:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of German trawler V 206 Otto Bröhan for deletionEdit

 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article German trawler V 206 Otto Bröhan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/German trawler V 206 Otto Bröhan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Fram (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi again! Could you run a Citation Bot on Lee Hall DepotEdit

I’ve been expanding the article a lot, but with reciting and all that, the citations are getting messy. So, since I can’t, could you run the Citation Bot on the page for me? Thanks for all the help. 108.45.170.249 (talk) 22:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC).

@108.45.170.249: - I don't run any bots. Will take a look at the article for you. Mjroots (talk) 06:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Ref #1 is a deadlink. Refs #3, 10 and 17 not available in UK so I can't tell if its dead or alive. Ref #9 I get an access denied message. Refs #11 and 15 are to Facebook, fails WP:RS. Ref #16 unavailable (in UK) due to legal reasons. Mjroots (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Ok, so I updated Ref 1, amd Refs 3, 10, 17, 9, and 16 all work fine for me. And, for Refs 11/15, if's their official Facebook page. It's like their official website since the old one was taken down. Also, when I said, run a citation bot, I meant to use this thing: https://citations.toolforge.org/ 108.48.97.70 (talk) 09:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC).

RiversEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

River LenEdit

Mike I feel quite pleased with myself! I had found the relatively new Geobox|rivers at River Trent and investigated. You will now see the result at this article (I took an easy one first!). There may well be other information - I couldn't work out the coordinates, and in any case a river covers more than one; couldn't find the exact length; and dunno if there is anywhere to be able to get flow rates etc. You may well be able to add more tributaries - I took the ones you had alraedy mentioned under the mills. None of the blanks come out until you give some information. I had also discovered the exact location of the source - a historical document on the Medway; I'm sure you also know more about its course, although perhaps that isn't too important. Peter Peter Shearan (talk) 21:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Mill symbolsEdit

As you see I have put two new symbols into your sandbox article. Just a quick fix. Using mills in this way is quite an extension. Come September we need to define what symbols we need- mills with weirs for example, millponds goits. I have been visiting the Dark Peak and realise how much more important water engineering was in the 1780s and the growth of the Cotton Industry. Still I am taking a break now. ClemRutter (talk) 08:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I have been talking with guys at WP:RIVERS and trying to work out what icon system to recommend. In a nutshell, the cyan worms are out, rivers are dark blue unless you need to differentiate- then non-navigable are light blue and navigable are darkblue. but I am still working on it. You have source at the top. River Len, Kent seems to be correct. See also Manchester Ship Canal for an upside down example. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers#Route diagrams gives the discussion.--ClemRutter (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

CadeauEdit

fr:Fichier:LeteaMill.jpg is heel mooi! --ClemRutter (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Medway diagramEdit

This takes a little thought. I like diagrams- very useful for showing mill locations- but there is a convention on canals that navigable should be darkblue and non navigable light blue. The tails as steams meet the river seem clunky. I have been concerned about the representation of reservoirs for some time- is a reservoir navigable or not- how do you show the dam bypass channel. In the simple case: a truncated salami would do- but they often are constructed at the confluence of several rivers. A lot of icons need some thought- and that will take a little time- I will put it on the list. (Some mills are on the wrong bank but that is minor). --ClemRutter (talk) 11:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I have put in far too many hours playing with the diagram on my talk page. Please look over- and see if there is anything to add- you will need to proof read the position of the mills relative to the new locks, and the addition of the Beult and the two mouths of the Teise. I have added some new icons to Template:Waterways legend particularly putting curved dams on reservoirs. --ClemRutter (talk) 19:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

To be positive: it is getting there. A few of your changes I don"t like. A river is a hydrographical item, as well as cultural one. The first uncollapsed diagram needs to stand in its own right, and give the reader basic infomation about its course. The collapsed bits need to show the twidddly bits, that the Teise at Yalding has bifurcated, and where mills were situated. When the course is a navigation we need info on the locks. Background colour needs to show whether the river is tidal, a navigation, or non-navigable. The section names are taken from the NRA, and are used by the waterways community- I don't think Lower Mid Upper is really informative. The whole diagram (uncollapsed) needs to be complete and informative in itself. I think that we should do another round of rollbacks and improvement then wrap it in a template and ask the WP:RIVERS for comment on any points where policy decisions need to be made. I would like to use it as a model to be attached to their policy page. I then want to code up the River Etherow, Irk, Irwell, Medlock, Goyt can't you just smell the cotton. --ClemRutter (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, width is critical when using collapsable box- expand all the section to see it isn't broken by the change. Titles a lot better- I took one look and thought- I knew I was about to to do that-- but I can't remember having done it. These wretched dock icons look awful- I am going to redo them- I cant see why a narrow dock should be five times wider than the river. I am more concerned about the length if the diagram, then allowing the diagram to be included in Kent pages that make a mention to the Medway. Then into Infoboxes.I am uploading images along the commons:Portland Basin- Ashton Canal at the moment.--ClemRutter (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Do you know this one? Template:Medway Navigation--ClemRutter (talk) 13:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


Well it is certainly ready to be wrapped in a template- so I have. We can do further editing there {{River Medway map}}. I did do one change as the Tidal estuary is downstream from Rochester.

True. There is a limit to the sort of ship you can drive under Rochester Bridge. I think the commissioner of HM Dockyard would agree with me. The London Stone is at Upnor, which is/was the upstream limit of the Port of London- but Rochester is miles from the Swale or Thames. This wrretched river never does things simply!--ClemRutter (talk) 08:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

RiversEdit

I have been putting a bit of input into Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers‎; that may interest you. Later tonight I will be posting some of the changes. --ClemRutter (talk) 17:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Template:River Waveney mapEdit

Hi. I notice you have updated the River Waveney map, but was a little surprised to see that it now runs from south to north. One of the problems of the transposition is that several of the adjoining rivers are now shown on the wrong side. Oulton Broad should be on the other side, as should the River Yare, and the Haddiscoe cut is no longer clearly labelled. I was going to try to sort it out but am a bit short of time at the moment. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I am back from holiday now, and have moved Oulton Broad, Haddiscoe Cut and the River Bure back to where they should be, corrected the direction of the locks, and produced a windmill symbol for the windmills. However, I have no sources for which side of the river the windmills should be on, and as the river and Haddiscoe Cut have now been transposed, wondered if you could just check them. Thanks. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Givors canalEdit

Hi, given your interest in France and transport and the fact that it's been sitting weeks, I wondered if you'd care to review this one for GA? If you;re not feeling very well I understand though, sorry to hear about that. Your talk page could do with archiving though its 159 kb! Hope you had a good Christmas!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:47, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

ShipsEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Shipwrecks on 5 July 1829Edit

Hi Mjroots, the two wrecks on 5 July 1829 (Cambria Castle and Carn Brea Castle), appear to be the same vessel. Hackman in his compendium of EIC and EIC-linked vessels gives the name as Carn Brea. Lloyd's Register has a Carn Brea but no Cambria Castle. I would combine the two, but am not sure how to do so while staying true to the sources. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 12:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin:   Done Mjroots (talk) 13:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. I have just created and uploaded Carn Brea Castle (1824 ship ), which I linked to the shipwrecks page. Acad Ronin (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
@Acad Ronin: - don't forget to add {{1829 shipwrecks}} and to add the ship to the template. Mjroots (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Done. Acad Ronin (talk) 04:13, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Shipwrecks in 1810Edit

Hi Mjroots, the description of the loss of Hope on 10 November is identical to the one on 17 November. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin: - well spotted. I've removed the later entry. Mjroots (talk) 03:22, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Am currently working on a Hope that I thought had been lost in 1810. I was wrong, but in passing I spotted the possible duplicate. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:37, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

DromedarioEdit

Hi Mjroots, I was digging around for info on a privateer named Dromedario when I came across the following site: [6]. Any idea what this second wiki is? The article looks like an automated/low quality translation from the Spanish. I would be willing to do some cleanup, but don't want to waste my energy if it is not somehow related to WP and incorporatable there. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Acad Ronin: It's a Wikipedia mirror, some of the the text content was copied verbatim from our site back in November 2020, some was machine-translated from other language Wikipedias. Don't rely on it, see Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/STU#second.wiki. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:09, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Redrose64, many thanks for the info. A lot of the article info seems correct, once one adjusts for machine translation. I will probably put a WP article on her on my list of things to do eventually. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:25, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Because it's a mirror, you cannot use it as a ref source since that would violate WP:CIRCULAR. You need to find a different source. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

HMS Guachapin (1801)Edit

Hi Mjroots, Guachapin appears actually to have been Spanish, at least at the time of her capture; I believe that 3decks is incorrect (They are usually correct, but I believe not in this case.) Some time ago I tripped over the London Gazette notice of her capture by Sans Pareil, which makes it quit clear that at the time of her capture she was Spanish. The relevant info is under the section "Privateer". Her name is also Spanish, suggesting that she was launched under another name before becoming Spanish. I checked their website, but expect to revert, while adding in the Bayonne launch. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 23:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Hmm, we might need to tweak the List of ship launches in 1800 and move her to a "Name unknown" entry, depending on what you discover. Mjroots (talk) 06:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Orange Bay on shipwrecks articlesEdit

Are you able to disambiguate Orange Bay on List of shipwrecks in 1819 and List of shipwrecks in May 1871 please?— Rod talk 15:40, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rodw: - I've unlinked both. Mjroots (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks - I couldn't work out where they should go.— Rod talk 16:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

"Rate" on ship launchesEdit

On List of ship launches in 1794 and List of ship launches in 1798 there are wikilinks to rate but doesn't appear to be Third rate or Fifth rate etc. As they are not British I din't think they should link to Rating system of the Royal Navy so I wan't sure what to do with them - any ideas?— Rod talk 15:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rodw: - I've removed the stray links. Appreciate your thoughts re the RN system, but AFAIK Threedecks gives the equivalent rating. Mjroots (talk) 15:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

MonarchEdit

Hi Mjroots, the reported loss of Monarch on an unknown date in August 1829 looks highly similar to the loss reported of a Monarch on 24 October 1829. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 19:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Possibly the same vessel, but given the events are two months apart it is possible there were two vessels of that name lost on similar voyages. Will leave as is. Mjroots (talk) 06:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but you have misread the November newspaper reference. The report was date-lined 15 September, so "24th ult." was in August.Davidships (talk) 22:27, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
@Acad Ronin and Davidships: removed from Oct list, moved to 24 Aug. Mjroots (talk) 06:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)


I created a "shipping-related" page. Could you look it over?Edit

I finished it, but it still needs some polish. Link to page: Arne Pettersen. Thank you for your time, Thebrakeman2 (talk) 15:44, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

@Thebrakeman2: - needs a little improvement with referencing. If you want to use the MT prefix (motor tanker), then use the ship template {{ship|MT|name|dab|6}} replacing "name" and "dab" with the relevant details. If no dab then just use {{ship|MT|name}}. This will ensure that the name is displayed correctly per [[MOS:SHIP}}. Mjroots (talk) 18:43, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
@Mjroots: - Done. Anything else? Maybe with the talk page? Thebrakeman2 (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
@Thebrakeman2: - I've added a couple of WikiProjects to the TP. No need to ping me on my own talk page, BTW. Mjroots (talk) 08:40, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
So, what do I do with the page draft for it now? Like, is it deleted? Link to draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thebrakeman2/Draft/Arne_Pettersen Thebrakeman2 (talk) 12:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
@Thebrakeman2: See WP:G7. Tag it with one of the templates there. Mjroots (talk) 15:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Which one would be best? They all look the same to me. Thebrakeman2 (talk) 15:58, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
@Thebrakeman2: any of them, the are in effect all the same. Mjroots (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
I added one of the templates. Thank you for the advice. Thebrakeman2 (talk) 16:02, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Calcutta lost in 1794Edit

Hi Mjroots: we have two listed next to each other. I believe, but cannot prove, that they are the same vessel. There is no Calcutta in the 1793 and 1794 volumes of Lloyd's Register, which suggests that they are both US vessels. A route NY→Savannah→Bahamas (Allwood Keys)→Havana seems entirely reasonable. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

John WesleyEdit

Hi Mjroots, we have her being wrecked on 28 March 1854 and 30 Marvh 1854. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 02:29, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin: consolidated to 28 March. 06:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Vorpostenboot topic reorganizationEdit

Hello Mj, I wanted to run something by you if you don't mind. I think that articles surrounding the Vorpostenboot topic are rather poorly organized. The List of Vorpostenboote in World War II‎ article is long and clunky, but I think the information value is still high. I would like to move around and restructure some of the articles to make it easier to navigate and find relevant information. Here is an outline of what I'd like to do, please let me know your thoughts:

For a list of all the Vorpostenboot, there is the navbox I made which has all of them. I feel an article going into all their details is both redundant, and overly complex and niche. I think all the flotillas are notable in their own right, even if just as faux-list articles. I think this new organization would make the topic more approachable and better organized, while allowing for greater nuance in the information presented. Again, your input and suggestions on this idea would really be appreciated. Fritzmann (message me) 12:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Fritzmann2002: - The Kaiserliche Marine also used vorpostenboote in WWI, so a move of the WWII list is not optimal. The individual Vorpostenflotille are probably notable enough to sustain articles, but check WP:MILUNIT. As for the individual ships, almost all of them are going to be notable enough to sustain stand-alone articles. Mjroots (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Good point. Perhaps Vorpostenflotille in World War II or something similar would be more appropriate? My concern is that the list in its current form is just really clumsy to work with, so I'm not married to a particular solution or path forward. Fritzmann (message me) 12:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Fritzmann2002:, losing the "list of" would work. No objection here. Mjroots (talk) 13:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

List of shipwrecks in 1921Edit

Hello Mj. About a decade ago you added SS Megali Hellas to the List of shipwrecks in 1921, with an appropriate redlink. I have just created SS Byron (1914), which was called Megali Hellas from 1921 until 1924. However, I am not sure whether this is the same ship, as your entry on "List of shipwrecks in 1921" describes her as a cargo ship. The Megali Hellas I have written about was, in effect, the flagship of the Greek transatlantic passenger fleet. On the other hand, she is the only Megali Hellas in Lloyd's Register for 1922, and I cannot find a copy of the 1921 edition online.

The source you cited is The Times. Please will you check your source to see whether the two articles refer to the same ship? Thankyou. Motacilla (talk) 20:56, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

@Motacilla: - it was the ocean liner. I've corrected the entry and added an additional ref which makes this clear. You can add the incident to the ship's article if you wish, along with the relevant shipwrecks navbox and category. Nice article; one observation - it's missing the navbox and categories for the 1926 fire. Mjroots (talk) 06:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Thankyou Mj! I will add it to the SS Byron (1914) article. Thankyou for the reminder about categories. But what is the navbox that it should have? Motacilla (talk) 06:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
@Motacilla: {{1921 shipwrecks}} and {{1926 shipwrecks}}. Entries in the "other incidents" section. Mjroots (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

SportEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

2018 FIA Formula 3 European ChampionshipEdit

Hi. Is it possible to put an indefinite requirement for editors to have autoconfirmed or confirmed access to 2018 FIA Formula 3 European Championship article? If you look to the history of edits here is the same persistent vandalism from people who can't understand a racing license concept like in case with Kamui Kobayashi and [7]. Cheers. Corvus tristis (talk) 05:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@Corvus tristis: - I've looked at the article and Marino Sato's article and I can't find a source that says he is racing under a San Marino licence. If you can add a source for that and the disruption continues, I'll be happy to semi-protect. Mjroots (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  Done. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2018_FIA_Formula_3_European_Championship&diff=prev&oldid=861115039 Corvus tristis (talk) 05:57, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Despite note and reference the situation remains the same... [8] This season contains many drivers with racing license differs from their actual nationality, so it will always confuse casual reader, can you put semi-protection now? Thanks. Corvus tristis (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
@Corvus tristis: - 3 months' should be enough. Mjroots (talk) 10:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Nationality and license issueEdit

Hi, there is again problem with IP editors how are not able to understand the racing license concept in Motorsport. Here we have more than a dozen reverts of Mahaveer Raghunathan flag. It happens despite the note and reference for his license, so the semi-protection could really help. Corvus tristis (talk) 06:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Corvus tristis: - semi'd for 3 months. Mjroots (talk) 06:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

For infoEdit

Hi - hope you are well. Incase you didn't get the ping, I mentioned you here. I hope the notification for the AfD was OK - IE netural per your last comment (which I've linked in that thread). If there's anything amiss with that, please let me know. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: - I was just answering there. All is OK with me. Mjroots (talk) 18:45, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Re: My editingEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Disambiguation link notification for January 17Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of ship launches in 1798, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rate.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 6Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of ship launches in 1800, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brooklyn, Nova Scotia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 6 February 2022 (UTC)


Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
 
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Re: Other usersEdit

Earlier discussions are archived here

Hey, thank you for knowing how to archive a certain talk page. Some questions though.Edit

Hi, thank you for knowing how to archive a certain talk page. I notice that It seems that you delete the entire sections of the talk page, then go to "new section" and "just cut from this talk page and paste in the archive above the {{abottom}} template." I kinda need a deeper picture in this one. XXzoonamiXX (talk) 20:11, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

@XXzoonamiXX: - that is an instruction for other editors. You are free to edit your own archive. Mjroots (talk) 02:59, 31 October 2021 (UTC)


919499spEdit

User:919499sp is still editing railway accident lists, & still adding "no problem" events. Obviously doesn't have a clue. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: - I've indeffed. Was hoping that it wouldn't come to this, but the good of the project is more important. Mjroots (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

In theoryEdit

Howdy. I'm not certain of the percentages. But I've found that editors who (deliberately) make their signatures appear distorted, tend to be problem editors in other areas. GoodDay (talk) 19:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

CIR from a while agoEdit

Remember Special:Contributions/919499sp? Somehow, I never removed their talk page from my watchlist... Looks like the CIR problem hasn't improved in any significant fashion. Obviously, it's not much trouble for anyone, and it is not like their comments are not much above trolling, but removing TPA might just encourage them to move on to somewhere else (and, on top of that, minimum effort to implement as well). Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 06:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

p.s. Your talk page might need a new incarnation - it looks almost like a userpage at this point... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 06:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
@RandomCanadian: - no need to revoke TPA as they're not being disruptive there. Maybe they'll be back in a few years when they've matured a bit. Mjroots (talk) 07:04, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
@RandomCanadian: - confession - it was early and the coffee hadn't kicked in. Having re-examined the situation, TPA has been revoked. Mjroots (talk) 10:50, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
I was going to wait until 14 February (three months after my last post there) and post a note saying something along the lines of "That is not an acceptable method for requesting unblock. We described the proper method on 5 November 2021, but you subsequently damaged those instructions on more than one occasion". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:47, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

This isn't going to end well...Edit

Hi, I don't know quite how to address this, but just saw a new user's user-page: User:RichardCra. I don't want to engage him on his viewpoints and suggest that this isn't an appropriate user-page or a good way to start an editing career here, and I'm not sure if it's fair to drag the account straight off to some admin noticeboard somewhere (I don't even know which), but I don't see a good outcome for an editor who starts by declaring that Black Lives Matter is a racist hate group. I wonder whether your more experienced/admin knowledge of WP can handle this better than me? Elemimele (talk) 09:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele and Doug Weller: - user page deleted as an attack page, user indeffed as they are clearly not here to build an encyclopedia. Mjroots (talk) 10:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Good call. You beat me to it by at the most minutes! Doug Weller talk 10:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Doug Weller and Mjroots, sorry to have bothered both of you! Thanks for sorting the problem. Elemimele (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
@Elemimele: given that Mjroots' talk page suggested they might not be available, that was sensible and stopped the inevitable vandalism in its tracks. Doug Weller talk 10:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: - I'm a carer. My editing of Wikipedia may be interrupted at any time, and for any amount of time. Hence the notice. Mjroots (talk) 10:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
That's an extremely important role (speaking as someone with Parkinson's and cancer who expects to need one in the future). Doug Weller talk 11:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)


Middlesbrough spelling (again)Edit

Hi, I hope you are doing well.

I know we've discussed this in the past and I understand that if you say "Middlesborough" in a list like this or this then it is deliberate because it reflects the sources. I'm fine with that and have learnt to ignore them while doing my slightly OCD-ish checks on this and other spellings.

Sorry to start off again ... this isn't quite that same question once more! But I have noticed that sometimes one of your sources is the Daily Gazette for Middlesborough and I wondered if in that particular case you were striving for consistency and if so which way, as I think I have seen both. One guess I should make is that they should all at that time say Middlesborough, though I have no knowledge of a cutoff point for the spelling change. Or maybe there is deliberate inconsistency because the source spelling varies?

I'm fine with whatever you tell me as again I can just learn to live with it – I would just like to be clear, if that is possible. Thanks and all good wishes DBaK (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered: - the DGM is "Middlesbrough". Any misspellings may be corrected. Those two you highlighted are likely also typos, I'll correct them. Mjroots (talk) 06:34, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Oh, thanks, that's lovely. I appreciate the clarity and I will try to factor this in when I am doing my spelling patrol! As always, if I get it wrong, please just let me know. Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

An editor with a COI at Munich air disasterEdit

Here is a link[9] to the talk page discussion. He has twice made not referenced edits to the article, and here is the one[10] showing his COI. Could you please look into this. Thank you....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@WilliamJE: - commented at talk page. Let's see if we can get through to him before I have to reach for the banhammer. Mjroots (talk) 11:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Another issue with Pat Burns MMMF (talk · contribs) is his user page. It appears to violate WP:UP#PROMO. Their attitude towards WP editors, as seen on his talk page and the Munich air disaster talk page isn't very good either. Do what you think is best....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:17, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

William JEEdit

How dare he say that about me. Anonymous editors casting aspersions. If I knew how to withdraw from here I would. Who the bloody hell does he, and that PEEJAY, think they are? Ban away please, I have no desire to want to update this site with valuable information any longer. Pat Burns MMMF (talk) 17:43, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

They are asking for an article ban. Please make his day. This time sink needs to end....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Not going to happen, WilliamJE. Have responded at his talk page. Best thing now is to move on. Mjroots (talk) 18:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Review required.Edit

Please review Special:Diff/1081259682. Consider POV and COI. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:49, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark: - Reverted as unsourced and failing NPOV. Mjroots (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
Do I smell socks? Wasn't there another brakevan editor with a COI? Mjroots (talk) 12:18, 6 April 2022 (UTC)