Open main menu



Thanks for your comment at Talk:Wormshill; would love to know more. Please add anything you can on the former mills although please do check we're talking about the same area! Many thanks Dick G (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks for adding that in. Please don't be offended if I tinker with the sentence style a bit, just want to make sure it fits with the rest of the piece. The name "Beddington" is baffling though. I don't doubt the book is right - it's a windy part of Kent after all! However the 1871 OS which I have shows "Bedmanton" and I can't seem to see any mills on it - appreciate that's 50 years later and a lot could happen in the time. Any chance you could email me a scan of the OS map you have? Would love to see an even earlier map of the area for general research. Cheers Dick G (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Michael - just a couple of coments about dates on post mills as in your recent changes to the Post Mills article - The 1627 date at Pitstone is a fake, it's actually 1697 (It was modified by Stanley Freese during his feud with Rex Wailes). The Great Gransden date is dubious as a date for the mill as a whole. Drinkstone's principle frame timbers have been dendro-dated to 1586 which makes it, at present, the earliest reliably dated post mill in England. Gareth Ghughesarch (talk) 15:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Windmills Thank you for the information and your help it is most appreciated will be sure to use a link to that article if it occurs again. Stavros1 (talk) 17:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: St. Martin's Windmill

Generally it is accept that the article should be at the place name without any qualifiers (a.k.a. Canterbury) unless there is already an article at said title. If articles are created about the other St. Martin's Windmills, the article can be moved to St. Martin's Mill (Canterbury) and a disambiguation page can be create to link to the other articles. Cheers! Redfarmer (talk) 12:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

What I would recommend you do before you create a lot of articles at the format you propose is create a new naming convention proposal at WP:NAME. This would be the fastest and best way to ensure that there is a consensus for your naming format. I dare say that if you keep creating articles under the format you are, they are likely to be moved by those like me who are not a member of your Wikiproject. With that said, I'm not an admin so I don't have the ability to move articles back anyway. As I've said, though, I strongly suggest you attempt to gauge community wide consensus on this issue before you create a lot of articles under such names as it would not be uncontroversial. Redfarmer (talk) 12:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Keston Windmill

Hi there, I've responded on the articles's talk page. Paulbrock (talk) 19:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

High Salvington windmill

Its a big improvement. One minor issue in that the manual of style says years WP:MOS are only wikilinked if you have the full date. The MOS stuff can be left for other editors, the important thing though is writing an article with citations in which you have succeeded. MortimerCat (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC) has corrected a detail about the winding of the Glynde Windpump. The 1929 photographs show a tail-pole, and we have no evidence there was ever a tail-vane. The entire structure is a rough-and-ready affair, constructed quickly and cheaply from readily available materials to do its pumping job. The tail-pole is loosely attached and must be lifted and used as a lever against the frame to turn the pump into the wind. In this sense, it isn't similar to the usual tail-pole of a post-mill, which tends to be attached at one end, suspended in place with a chain and radially fixed via its passing through the mill steps.

Boyd's Windmill

Unless "Common Sails" is a brand name, then sails shouldn't be capitalized, I'd say. --User:AlbertHerring Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla! 16:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Windmills and Gender (in reference to "New Mill, Cross in Hand" article

I posted the debate to the discussion page. I looked in to it briefly. Although referring to ships in the feminine is seemingly accepted on wikipedia (i.e. with the HMS Victory), the list of windmills refers to windmills as genderless in all of the articles I looked at (about a dozen). There may be something to your point that it is considered acceptable by some to refer to windmills in the feminine, however it seems to be the standard in articles you have not authored/edited to refer to them as "it". Perhaps settling on a standard and conforming to it is more important so as to give wikipedia a more consistent and professional feel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

List of windmills in France

Please use some more references for this article and try to add an introduction. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 11:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


There's no legitimate reason you can't create a WikiProject Mills if you can gather enough interest. – ClockworkSoul 14:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear it. It seems you have quite a few people who would be more interested in a Mills projects than a Windmills project. – ClockworkSoul 14:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I discovered this thread in a roundabout way. One of my interests is Gunpowder and until (say) about WW II Gunpowder was always made by water-powered mills. So I have an interest. There are a few articles that could be expanded to include more of the water-power aspects, in particular: Ballincollig Royal Gunpowder Mills, Eleutherian Mills, Faversham explosives industry, Waltham Abbey Royal Gunpowder Mills, and a stub at Pontneathvaughan; and there are more articles that could be written. I'm working my way through all of them, but the water-power aspects has not always been emphasised as much s it could be.Pyrotec (talk) 16:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

NRHP windmills

Hi, can you revisit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Windmills and comment on the pic that i added there? Not sure what type it is. Also, feel free to expand there on your proposal for a WikiProject Mills, which I do support. Cheers, doncram (talk) 16:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Dutch windmills

Hi! Please have a look at nl:Wikipedia:Wikiproject/Nederlandse windmolens. We are trying to create an article including photos for each windmill in the Netherlands that is still intact today. On the page in the link, you can see the progress of the project (the table at the bottom is the most accurate). Regards, Quistnix (talk) 22:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Debden windmill

The Debden windmill page only needs minor edits for grammar, flow and capitalization. Citations and format look fine. I am a new user, so if I did something unusual in tagging it, please let me know. Thanks MattDredd (talk) 19:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

London Windmills

Categories tend to use current subdivisions, so articles in Category:Buildings and structures in London and even Category:Former buildings and structures of London use the current boundaries, not ancient ones. Mills that are no longer working are often still open as museums in the here and now, so should be unambiguously categorised by current location. Perhaps a category scheme based around operational dates could be included as well as the location categories? MRSCTalk 08:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I am sure we can work out something that will work. This affects a range of historic buildings and structures, which may have been operational in one era and remain, perhaps converted for some other use. The approach should be consistent across all these types. In this context, I'm not seeing windmills as a special case. MRSCTalk 08:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

According to convention, the categorisation of articles, the primary description of location in articles, and the templates linking articles should all use the current, ceremonial counties only. County-wide lists should be primarily about the current area, but for example on the Kent list, those areas now within Greater London could either be marked with a "†", referring to a footnote or indicated in some other way. MRSCTalk 16:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Upminster Windmill

The reference to the steam engine being removed to Walthamstow during WW2 did come from the book by Anthony Butler, so I've added the ref just to make this clear. Romfordian (talk) 20:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Porter would not be pleased

Sorry for the confusion in the DYK forum -- I am a fan of Oh, Mr. Porter! and I incorrectly assumed that your entry was for that film. For whatever reason, I just focused on the film title and not the windmill. I apologise for any confusion or stress that error may have created.

Windmill article naming

Where the simplest article naming is available, it is generally usual practice to use that. Articles should not be unneccasarily disambiguated by a suffix. Clearly, where two articles exist that could occupy the same locatation, then disambiguation should be used. The approach taken to article title disambiguation should be more pragmatic than systematic. Articles can always be moved later, where a naming conflict comes to light. MRSCTalk 10:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Somerset Windmills

Hi Mjroots. Noticed these are on your to-do list. Anything I can give you a hand with? Ning ning (talk) 14:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reply. I haven't seen a copy of C & W for a number of years! I made some notes from it, and visited a few sites- I'll dig through them and see if anything can be done. Do you have Farries & Mason on Surrey mills? I can access a copy ( I think). Ning ning (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Even that one in bits on the grass verge at a hotel near Gatwick? :) Ning ning (talk) 19:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

England mill naming

Hello. I want to come up with a naming convention for these articles. I've developed one here. Have a look and let me know your thoughts. MRSCTalk 18:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Sibsey Trader Mill

In case you did not notice it arrive. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 02:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

King's Mill

Not sure about the policy for place naming whether to go to the parish, nearest village, county or I also thought abour "Trent". Do you have a rationale? I'm quite willing to change it but I'm not sure if its current name is inaccurate although it is nearly in Derbyshire. Oh I see you have another mill ref above. I was trying to put this article in the correct cat. Leicestershire seems to have quite a few mill articles but they seem to be all windmills and only one is in the Leics windmill cat. Any advice? cheers Victuallers (talk) 09:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


Hi Mj. The chapel in Jack is in Mid Sussex, and so isn't in the remit of Churches and places of worship in Brighton and Hove. Jack and Jill are just (ahem) up the hill from my house, incidentally, and Oldland Mill is just round the corner as well. There are two mills in the city of Brighton and Hove, though: Waterhall and West Blatchington. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 18:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

<Embarrassed> Oh yes; the really obvious, visible one! Oops! (I've even stood on the coast road taking photos of it...) Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 18:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Windmills in Germany

Hallo Mjroots, thank you for your intention to translate the lists into german and for the message on my german talk page. I looked up, where some of my photos are in use and I found your list. In the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Project we were astonished about your work here. We actually are working on similar lists, see examples for churches, waters, castles and manors. But till now nobody worked at lists of windmills :).

Please let me know on my german talk page, when you are ready in your sandbox, so that I or someone else can read over it and correct last translation errors and links. So we can prevent edit conflicts. I'm sure, that this lists will grow (details, photos, ..) in the future. Thank you again. Greets --DeNiteshift (talk) 19:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I consider whether it is perhaps better to build all lists on your user sides and set it into the article area after this. I only want to prevent that the list gets a deletion request, because it is incomplete. The rules in the German Wikipedia are surely harder as here. --DeNiteshift (talk) 19:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Btw: de:Windmühlen in Berlin already exists and it's even a featured article. And you don't have to use the translation tool to answer at my talk page, please write in English only. Im rolling on the floor about the Bablefish accident: "Bitte Bär in Gemüt" :) --DeNiteshift (talk) 20:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I think the main list is ready. I'll also help you with the other lists. Of course we are dependent on the knowledge of the local patriots, when the lists are released. --DeNiteshift (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Brandenburgs list is ready to release. --DeNiteshift (talk) 14:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thuringia and NRW are ready, too. Greets --DeNiteshift (talk) 04:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Saxony-Anhalt is ready for take-off. --DeNiteshift (talk) 19:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

..and last but not least: Saxony --DeNiteshift (talk) 22:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Turmholländer usw

This could start to get out of hand... I have had a sniff around in :de but not yet in :nl, and the English Windmill article needs a good shaking. I have sorted out the concept of Holländern as anything where just the cap rotates- and from the Dutch reference what a Paltrockmühle must be but I really didn't want to get involved any further at this stage. I keep having a a nagging feeling that a few svgs are needed!ClemRutter (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Starston Windpump

Hello Mjroots

I think the image that you tried to place in the info box is the one that I uploaded at commons from Flicker.Com. I thought it had a common share copyright but I was mistaken and the image has now been deleted. If you can get hold of an image for this page it would been a great contribution to the page. Unfortunately it is at the wrong end of Norfolk for me to photograph.  stavros1  ♣  12:53, 3 November 2008(UTC)

Moses Montefiore Windmill

Yes in was indeed. See the google link here (first several links). I don't know who the Holman Brothers are, but it was bought and from Canterbury and while I've never heard it called the Jaffa Gate Mill it is defintly that, it is right next to Jaffa Gate and it is the mill that was built there for the new community. Epson291 (talk) 22:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

So please add to it, I think that would be great. Epson291 (talk) 22:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I looked into it and it was indeed by the Holman Brothers, check out this article here and look at comment (talkback) number four. Epson291 (talk) 22:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for nominating the article. In addition to that user breaking a website link in that edit (because it contained the word Israel in its URL), a common vandalism is to replace every instance of the word "Israel" with "Palestine," regardless of where it's found. Even though the words Ottoman and Palestine are already found in the article, I tweaked the lead a little to include more information on it, but there's no reason not to say what country the city is in, especially when you consider that the windmill is located within Israel proper. Epson291 (talk) 05:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey there. Sorry I haven't checked it out yet. Sometimes I don't check me email for months unless prodded. Did not realize you had sent it already. It's a little late here, so I'll take a gander at it for tomorrow, if you don't mind. I'm just mindlessly perusing some core articles right, looking for big fish to fry (edit) later. ;) Thanks for sending it though and I'll make sure to look at it when I'm a bit more lucid. Tiamuttalk 22:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

High Salvington Windmill

Removing the Myths section caused problems. I asked members to look at the page and come back to me with changes and references, and a few weeks later remind them, and they would eventually look and say that they couldn't find the sections I had referred to, and I would look and see that the sections had been removed, reverse the change and notify the members again. Then, before they had a chance to look, the sections would have been removed again. Directors meet every three months (and all members only get together only three or four times a year), so there tends to be a 3-4 month turnaround on some issues, such as this.

There should now be references for every section and we are working to add to and improve them. This will take time and requires all of our members to be able to see the page, unchanged, for several months, at least. For example, there are 80-odd years of Newcomen Society papers to work through and hundreds of other documents in the Sussex Mills Archive, and elsewhere, that may be pertinent, to look at to identify all of the repetitions of and refutations for the mythology.

We will be convening a history team in the coming months to work on developing the education centre, documenting the known history of the mill and cataloguing and photographing or scanning our collection of artefacts and photographs. It would be useful if we could update the Wikipedia page, as and when relevant, as our work progresses. The alternative is that we find an alternative site for any reference material we accumulate, which will almost certainly be copyrighted and not available to Wikipedia. We certainly have some members who would prefer this, but I think that would be a shame.

There are a number of myths that we haven't tackled because the facts are obvious to those who began restoring the mill 30 years ago, but nobody thought to document. An example is the published statement, repeated at this Industrial Archeology Society page, that the mill was insured against fire in 1774 by the Sun Insurance Company. I am told that the fire insurance mark (made of lead) that was usually affixed to the outside of a building at that time to signify the insurance, and which provides the date, is a fake. You would have to come to the mill to examine the artefact and have knowledge of the fire insurance marks used by this company. If what I am told is true, then the status of this myth is completely verifiable, but the verifiability is not something that Wikipedia is equipped to deal with. So, when you say that Wikipedia works on Verifiability, it is a particularly Wikipedian form, that we are going to require time to learn how to accommodate. In this case, I think, simply proving that the fire insurance mark is a fake is insufficient, and we would have to, somehow, demonstrate the completeness of extant Sun Insurance Company records for the period and the absence of a record for our mill. Until we can find and motivate a volunteer to do this, we cannot verify the status of this "myth" in a way that Wikipedians might be satisfied with.

So, while the references for the Myths we have published may not be ideal, they are the Myths we are confident we can adequately refute, especially if enough members have the time to track down the references, working with the page in its current form. Those where we cannot yet refute in a Wikipedian-compatible way, will remain unpublished. (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your pointer to H.E.S. Simmon's notes from the Royal Exchange fire insurance registers. I have yet to narrow this down to a specific reference, or locate a copy, but I expect the library will be able to work with the above description, otherwise I may be able to find the time to visit the Guildhall Library some time in January. I have only found one oblique reference to these notes via Google. Valerie Martin, at Findon Village claims that the mill was insured against fire by "Royal Exchange Insurance" policy No. 33161 dated 1757. As far as I can tell, this predates the earliest of the policies indexed by the project at Birkbeck College, so there may be no index, but with an exact policy number, we should be able to verify or disprove this specific claim. (My colleagues at the Mill Trust tell me that Valerie has used images and text that are the copyright of members without attribution, which has upset them greatly. I shall have to be circumspect in talking to her about the source of her claim as they are very touchy on this subject).
I note that the Peter Hemming book mentioned in the "Further Reading" section repeats some of the nonsense, almost word for word, as published in the old publicity leaflets. It is such a shame that good stories travel further than dry old facts. If you have any suggestions about how I track down copyright holders, they would be appreciated, as I would like to make facsimiles of the old leaflets available. (talk) 14:54, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The Glynde Wind Pump

I think that it is time that this had its own page, with a link from the High Salvington Windmill page, but, we have a problem of verifiability for some of the data. We know from knowledge collected over the years by the Sussex Mills Group (part of the Sussex Industrial Architecture Society), SPAB (Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, and elsewhere, that the pump was used to raise the water for the steam engine that powered the turbines which generated the electricity for the world's first commercial Aerial tramwayTelpherage system at Glynde, but while there are lots of documents that refer to the telpherage, including a facsimile of a London Times article recorded in the New York Times archive, the documents I have seen do not mention the pump. We have access to (copyrighted) photographs of the pump going back to the early 20th Century, and some show the old engine house in the background, which we think still exists, in a semi derelict state. Even if we find a volunteer with the time to contact Lord Hampden's archivist and we can acquire from Andrew Norman (who bought the wind pump from him and removed it from the Glynde estate, and from whom the High Salvington Mill Trust bought it), we may find documents but, unless they are in a published form somewhere, can we cite them as evidence to satisfy Wikipedian ideas of Verifiability?

Perhaps the existing information should be transferred to its own page, but we should record the investigatory process on the discussion page? (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Charente Maritime

Hi Mjroots You are doing a great job of the windmills in France. I own one of the two mills in Loire Sur Nie, and the photos you have on the site were taken by me. My mill is only known as 'Les Groies'. I guess 'Moulin de Mark' has come from a friend of mine in France, but it definately is not it's name. I am sure of the dates I added. Both dates are carved in the stone,...the second one marking the increase in height made in 1888.


Mark Marklead (talk) 22:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Norfolk Windmills

Hi there, fantastic to hear that you are compiling a list on the subject. The use of the sandbox is a great idea and I will do the same thing; after all two people working on the subject is better than one! keep me updated. - Rackellar (talk) 18:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will start from Y. Shall keep you updated. - Rackellar (talk) 18:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, I will prune some of the details from the list. Thanks for the advice. - Rackellar (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Just making a note of both Witton Postmills at Brundall and Ridlington. These need to be added later on - Rackellar (talk) 22:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. I've had so much going on that I had to put that on the back burner. I will get back to it this week. What did you need doing? - - Rackellar (talk) 00:45, 15 February2009 (UTC)


Normally when I stray into a new area of WP, I find you are already active. However, I have moved into Cotton, starting with List of mills owned by the Lancashire Cotton Corporation Limited and this has led to Stationary Steam Engines and Cotton Processing.. a rich and under developed field-- so do come and join me! --ClemRutter (talk) 17:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Ifield Water Mill

Hi again, Mjroots, and thanks for your note. On the "water mill" vs "watermill" naming, after some deliberation I went for the two-word form as all sources I used preferred that form. I suppose a redirect ought to be set up for the one-word form, at least. There's very little info about the mill machinery, unfortunately: the sources just mention the flow control mechanism being brought in and installed during the restoration. I'm not even sure if the mill is now active again, although I think it may be; that was always the intention of the restoration, anyway. I'll keep a look out for info on this. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Dutch windmills

Hi, just an update from the Netherlands: at nl.wikipedia we've almost completed writing articles about all 1,169 windmills that are still intact. There's still a lot of photo work to be done (we still need some 250 photos). I'll start working on the watermills soon. Over the last six months or so, many photos of windmills and watermills were uploaded to Commons, and categorised there. If you want me to help updating the lists on en:, just write me a message on my talk page on nl.wikipedia. Regards, Quistnix (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Leicestershire windmills

I have a photo, around 1920, of a windmill which we think (but cannot verify without visiting site) is Great Bowden windmill. Can supply picture if you want John Yeomans (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC) (UTC)

Nottinghamshire windmills

Hi, thanks for the invite. I have some notes on Notts mills, culled from books and the record office, but...they were compiled some years back and don't have citations. Maybe the best thing is for me to put them up on a separate page and you can pick through them. They have approximate OS refs. Ning-ning (talk) 09:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I've set up this- User:Ning-ning/Notts_mills Ning-ning (talk) 09:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll start adding to the list from the book. The Forest mills probably deserve an article on their own, but the only info I have has already been put in the sandpit- it is a bit contradictory. Nottingham Museums sell (or used to sell) a postcard of a painting of them, I think it shows 14 mills. There is one photo extant of one Forest mill that was moved to a neighboroughing county. Ning-ning (talk) 18:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

List of windmills in the United Kingdom

Apologies- might have accidentally undone your table fix on the Shropshire Mills. Ning-ning (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thelnetham Windmill

Congratulations on your 300th new article Avatar 06349 (talk) 12:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll have another read, but probably not today.jimfbleak (talk)

OK, it's all done, it's a nice article. I'm aware that other reviewers may or may not share my opinion of the appropriateness of the lists. I'm not going to watch the page, so you could put them back in at the risk of a possible GAR. Having said that, you talk page solution is a good idea. jimfbleak (talk) 10:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Staffordshire windmills

Approximately 65 still to be added. Do you want to hive the list off now, or wait until I'm finished (might take a week!) Ning-ning (talk) 20:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Finished, and ready for moving. Ning-ning (talk) 08:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Two unknown mills

I've put a couple of pics on my talk page. First one is a reconstructive drawing of a Somerset mill, based on a photo from the book- trouble is, I can't remember which mill it is! Second has got me really puzzled- a watermill in a sparsly inhabited mountainous area from an album made about 1890 (platinum prints). The rest of the photos show sheep farming, small rocky mountains, conifers, a chapel, a church and some domestic buildings all looking like they are in the British Isles somewhere...the scenery looks Scottish but the buildings don't. Any idea? Ning-ning (talk) 08:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Mills task force

It's decision time, see WT:HS Mjroots (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks good but- the priority task list seems to ignore the textile mills, and only briefly touch water. This needs to be tweaked, then I think we will pull on board 2 or three from the Greater Manchester project. Also as the entire Industrial Revolution and civilisation as we know it was dependent on Cotton it lays strength to the claim. I will try and think of my additions. The propose image might be better if the red splodges were less prominent. I can Gimp them if that will help.

--ClemRutter (talk) 10:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)== Mills as a Task force of WikiProject Historic sites ==

Hi Mjroots, your lists mentioned at Talk:Old Mill are surprising me with how extensive they are. Clearly almost all of the mills you cover are historic sites comparable to U.S. NRHPs and to U.K. listed buildings or other historic site registers. I recall also supporting your proposal at the WikiProject Council for a Wikiproject Mills, but since that does not exist now I guess it never seemed to have quite enough support. Since there now is wikipedia:WikiProject Historic sites, how about creating an effective wikiproject technically as a Task Force there? You would benefit in various ways, from raising the profile of the mill-lists and getting tagging and other support. I for one would be happier investing time in helping to fix up these extensive disambiguation pages (Old Mill, Black Mill, etc.) if I could tag the disambiguation pages as being part of wp:HSITES, in parallel to how I work on disambiguation pages having NRHP sites, as part of Wikiproject NRHP. The still-new HSITES wikiproject currently has just one Task Force, this could be a second one. Mill articles tagged would be specifically identified as being part of the Mills Task force. Could you take a look at the Historic Sites Wikiproject, and perhaps look at general guidelines on task forces, at wp:TASKFORCE? Regards, doncram (talk) 07:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes i have been aware of your lists of windmills in the Netherlands, France, and other countries. I am being especially surprised how many you are accumulating in the English lists though, apparently as many in Suffolk say as in all of France. Yes, there is an issue to be discussed about the HSITES intent to cover only places that are officially registered. Do let's discuss at the Talk page there. At a very minimum, there could be agreement for a Task Force to cover the many mills that are listed buildings or otherwise registered, but I think it can be closer to what you might really want than just that. Please do open a topic there. doncram (talk) 08:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
An old estimate of the number of windmill sites in the British Isles is 10,000, but probably a better estimate is 5,000, fifty of which are in Rutland (source Nigel Moon) .Ning-ning (talk) 09:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

West Wratting windmill

West wratting windmill is probably at the highest point in cambridgeshire it is about 120m above sea level. it has a gorgeous view cos of the generally low lying land around it well actually it is kinda on the top of a hill. I have been up it the family opened it up a couple of years ago. THe machinery is intact but not used. It is a post mill. Three storeys and quite a climb. I've never seen the sails going but i know the family and can get in touch with them if you want. In west wratting the person you want to get is suzanne langford she is kinda local historian i am a back room boy so i do that bit and she does the history bit and it seems to work quite well between us. Its a post mill as i think also is the one at Fulbourn.

I am in the process of moving so am a bit stressed please excuse me but yeah more than happy to help. I cant recall off the top of my head which is annoying me cos i will remember it in ten minutes but i know them and they are good friends of mine i have done a load of work for them so no probs if you need anything just the next few days i am a bit busy.

Just blahing here so excuse it just being a ramble i can put it much better but just in case its any interest to you I will sort it out SimonTrew (talk) 20:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

actually OS has gog magog hills as highest point in cambridgesire but its a close run thing and i reckon it is higher. SimonTrew (talk) 20:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
arrgh cant remember michael and someone and their surname starts with b i can picture them but cant find the name but they are lovely. and they will help you out no probs. arrgh i will get it just eludes me right now SimonTrew (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:Packwood Windmill photo

If this postcard is the only evidence of its existence, it should not be included in the list anyway, as a postcard is not a reliable source (on another note, the fact you have to sign in does not make a source any more or less reliable- sure, it's less accessible, but it's more accessible than, say, out of print books). Unless the content can be demonstrated to be out of copyright, it must be assumed to be in copyright, and so must meet our non-free content criteria. I'm afraid illustrating a single mention in a long list does not meet our non-free content criteria. So, if the image is being used as a reference, the entire entry in the list should be removed us unreferenced, while if the image is being used as an illustration, it should be removed for not meeting the non-free content criteria. J Milburn (talk) 18:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm meaning that the source is not reliable per the reliable sources guidelines. Pictures make dubious sources anyway, but as this was never published in an informative fashion... J Milburn (talk) 19:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
For a single image like this, the best place would probably technically be files for deletion, but I doubt it would get much attention. Perhaps we could raise it on the non-free content talk page? I admit, this is a rather unusual case. J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm always a little dubious about the third opinion process, but I'm a third eye could shed some light on the issue. If considered non-binding, more thoughts on a subject are always a good thing. I'll ask on IRC, see if anyone is willing to offer a third opinion. J Milburn (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I've copied our comments over to Talk:List of windmills in Warwickshire, so anyone entering the discussion can easily follow what's being said. Further comments should go there. J Milburn (talk) 20:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
There's an admin only channel, but there are also a lot of "everyone welcome" channels. I asked in both, but no one was interested. J Milburn (talk) 20:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

(od) I hope my "3O" was useful. Your comments about the windmill lists were useful, especially map symbols (I have some locations from the 1832 OS which I hesitated to use- unfortunately my notes pre-date the internet let alone Wikipedia, and I'm having problems "interpreting" them). I'm surprised J Milburn didn't pick up on the implications of Bridgeman-Corel. Ning-ning (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content‎- the next section, while researching my argument I had a look for the Packwood image. It has been deleted.--ClemRutter (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
My gripe is the cavalier way, images are treated on NonFree. Having made some strong comments- and hurt a few egos I can guarentee that nothing will be done and we will have the same problem again six months down the line. --ClemRutter (talk) 20:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Doub's Mill Historic District

You will want to add Doub's Mill Historic District to the wikiproject - it's a striking building with a still-functioning millrace (but no machinery). Acroterion (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wall Street Mill wasn't operated by water - it's in the middle of the Mojave Desert. It just used water to process the ore, presumably with some form of fuel or electric power. I should probably make the language more clear. Acroterion (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK Frettenham Windmill

  Hello! Your submission of Frettenham Windmill 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! Materialscientist (talk) 09:14, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of East Dereham Windmill

  Hello! Your submission of East Dereham Windmill 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! Law type! snype? 12:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


If you go ahead and lay out the correct links ready for starting I'll be happy to start them like that. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I would also create navigation templates by province of Netherlands linking all the articles together. The article can also be expanded from dutch using google translate which isn't perfect but will give you some more information about it that you can decipher. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:22, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Given that I am extremely busy, what makes you think I have time to meet all of your demands? Dr. Blofeld White cat 18:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Hehe. I'll do what I can, I'll start some every few days if I can, soooo busy! Dr. Blofeld White cat 18:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Wouldn't it be better to add this info in the article though? It's quite strange to see a building date of 2002 for such an ancient building.. :) Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand, I'm busy with other stuff too, so I guess we'll leave it to another windmill enthusiast.. I'm not really, but bumped into the new articles when browsing through the new articles and noticed the "strange" dates, hence I contacted Dr. Blofeld. Cheers and good luck with the English mills. Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Lovely work! I'll get on with creating more articles when I have a moment. I also have a truckload of Malayalam films so help Tinu with too.... Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of De Heidebloem, Erica

  Hello! Your submission of De Heidebloem, Erica 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! 09:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to go a little beyond the template here and say that I genuinely do want this nomination to succeed. That's why I caught it almost as soon as it was posted. As the response on the DYK page makes clear, I have several severe objections to the article and hook as things now stand, but I'm in no way saying that my "No" today can't be a "Yes" tomorrow. I really don't like your source being the only source on record, and I especially don't think that kind of source is appropriate to the hook. I'm also concerned that various Google searches (variously using the words "smock", "mill", "molen", "De Heidebloem") usually return your article as the #1 choice. There is the possibility that the subject isn't truly notable enough for a Wikipedia article. But I really think we need more Dutch articles in DYK, so please do try to find other sources to correct its referencing deficiencies. CzechOut | 09:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I think you've misunderstood my objections, which could in part be due to an inadequacy of my own communication skills. I don't have a problem with windmill articles. I have a quite reasonable objection to a hook which is only backed up by a tertiary source. This is why notability of the subject was not a part of my DYK objection, and I certainly have no interest in starting an AfD. I only mentioned it on your talk page because it occurred to me as a potential problem for the long term viability of the article in the course of trying to help you find more sources for the hook. I absolutely did not perform a "Google test" to establish notability. Google tests do not in and of themselves determine notability one way or another (WP:GNUM). As I said both here and at the DYK nom, I think we need more Dutch articles, and I want to be able to turn my "no" into a "yes". That's why I've given you a ton of time to try to reverse the sourcing problem. You introduced the discussion about notability to the DYK nom, likely based on the mistaken impression that what I said here was what I was saying there.
I should point out that just because you got two other similar articles successfully through the DYK process, that doesn't invalidate my objections to this one, per a logical extension of WP:INN/WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It's a long list at T:DYK, and I can't be expected to know all details of everything that's come before, nor am I responsible for other editors making mistakes. So, please, let's return to the issue actually at hand. This hook can't be verified independently and no source currently quoted in the article is a valid, secondary source. Please find said sources, because, again, I do genuinely want more Dutch articles in DYK. CzechOut | 19:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
While we're making progress — and I certainly appreciate your genuine efforts to improve things — I think we're not there yet. I've posted a reply at WP:RSN. We really need some totally uninvolved people to weigh in, cause, at the moment, the WP:RSN discussion is made up exclusively of participants to the T:TDYK discussion, and there's documentary evidence that you and Drmies were predisposed to agree with each other anyway. I'm certainly prepared to shift in my opinions, as I've already done with the DHM database. But no argument yet advanced is really assuaging my misgivings about the Mollendatabase. By ending my last reply with a single question of appropriate sourcing, perhaps it'll make it easier for others to join in. CzechOut | 08:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
See, it's exactly this "dance around sourcing policy" that's at the heart of my prolonged skepticism. That you even ask the question, "Wikipedia policy does not say 'at no time whatsoever shall a SPS be used as a reference', does it?" makes me scratch my head. You're really trying to protect the inclusion of a personal homepage? It's so obviously an objective violation of WP:SPS, it hardly deserves comment, but I think you're so desperate to get any kind of source for this article that you've lost your objectivity. So I'll comment.
You are correct in that WP:SPS does not completely ban self published sources from Wikipedia. But it does severely and specifically restrict them. Remember, policy trumps any guideline or rule. So the highest-order instruction on this matter is WP:SPS. And as I read the policy, the only exception, except in cases of articles about the self publisher themselves, is that Herb here would have to have work in the relevant field previously published by reliable third-party publications. Got any proof that Herb's been published in the field of Dutch architectural history, or mill history or the like? If not — and let's face it, this is just an amateur who's gotten bit by the genealogy bug — there's not an exception to be made for this source.
As for the broader issues at the WP:RSN, I do hope you can see the value of getting completely uninvolved voices into the discussion. Not people from any version of WP:MILLS, not people who've weighed in before — people whose expertise isn't Holland or windmills, but interpreting WP sourcing policy. In the long run, it'll help out your work on WIkipedia to have objective confirmation that Mollendatabase is a valid resource, so I encourage your patience. CzechOut | 14:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Early windmills

Where does 1137 Leicester reference come from? No idea. It had no clear citation, so I added the word "perhaps" since it sounds too early, but I hesitated to remove the claim since it's possible some new research turned up new evidence. Maybe it comes from the Encyclopedia reference cited later. Lynn White Jr. (1962) in Medieval technology and social change p. 87, lists some early references to European windmills and they're all late twelfth century. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awwiki (talkcontribs) 08:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't you mean the Weedley mill of 1185 rather than 1135? 1185 is what Lynn White Jr. says is earliest certain reference(there are possibly earlier but more dubious references). That 1137 Leicestershire reference may come from that "Encyclopedia of Energy" reference that is later cited. Check it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awwiki (talkcontribs) 08:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Windmills in Bucks

Hi, As I was not sure if deleting an entry would destroy the integrity of the windmill listings I thought it best to add a note and leave the experts to sort this out, if necessary. Basically, Hawridge and Cholesbury are neighbouring villages/parishes. The smock mill and the tower mill which replaced the former when it was demolished are recorded both as 'Cholesbury Mill' and 'Hawridge Mill'. The reason for this was although just on the Cholesbury side of the respective parish boundaries being visible whether approached from either village it colloqually became known as one or other depending on the direction of arrival. Also in some trade directories it appears in the entries for both villages although on balance its fair to say it was probably listed more frequenly under Hawridge pre 1886 and more often Cholesbury post 1886 The latter name is what is still used most frequently today, but some older Hawridge villages still call it Hawridge Mill. By the way the mill actually became a steam driven mill in its latter years as their was insufficent wind to keep it working all the time! Hope this helps! Tmol42 (talk) 18:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Dutch Mill Database

Did you know 'molendatabase' has an english version as well. You can use (with the correct id of course). Of course not the long text, but there is then a link to the dutch version as well. Akoopal (talk) 08:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Windmill at West Wratting, Cambs


I was asked to get some info on this mill, which I have, but the respondent never followed it up. I know the people who own it I know well enough to get more info from it. It is a post mill and has only the threads of the sails not whole sails, but the machinery inside is in good condition though not currently working. it's a beautiful view from the top and, I would guess, having done a little research, the highest point in cambs.. almost 130 metres above mean sea level (well that's high for us fen fodder)

You are better at OS refs than me but if you find West Wratting on the OS map it should be there- it is about 200 yards south of the PH it is not marked on my OS Landranger. I am sure Gabby or David would be more than happy to give you info or I have some other history; it has been in her family for at least a century. I am being deliberately vague because I don't like to give out lots of details in public but I can easily get you RS for this mill and lots of history. I am prepping an article on West Wratting now in my user space but because I don't live there any more it is going a little slowly.

Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 02:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Buxford Mill


Just saw your message. We've lived there for the last 10 years and are planning to put a new wheel in with the hope of deriving some power. There seems to be scare lttle history on the mill apart from a old map which showed the mill race running into the house and a channel coming out of the side of the building a little further on. talk 14:48, 24 August 2009

DYK nomination of De Sterrenberg

  Hello! Your submission of De Sterrenberg 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! Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 16:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Union Mill, Cranbrook

Are you aware that you've geotagged Union Mill, Cranbrook as being in the middle of Grove Green in Maidstone? I've just checked out the window here, and it's not there :-) --Neil (talk)

List of windmills in Poland

(You wrote)
I've restored the image size to 150px in line with the other 91 lists of windmills. Thanks for narrowing down a location, assistance with other dabbed locations would be welcome. Strangely enough, I managed to pinpoint the correct Nowa Wieś! Mjroots (talk) 19:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about reducing the size of images. I was not aware of the popular format. Anyhow, I will look into other locations time permitting, thanks for the invitation. --Poeticbent talk 03:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I have found the List of the windmills in Poland (most of them in two voivodenship). It is almost complete (very few exceptions, which I know). There are several errors on this website (Mazry insread of Mazury, Ciekawy, etc.). "Ciekawy" means "interesting" and it can not be a name of a village ("interesting windmill"). There is not "Bielizn" (actually on en-wiki we have all Polish villages - all), perhaps it is the name of peculiar place near Żarówka). "Stary" means "Old" it can not be name of any village (too much possibilities - Stara Kamienna, Stare Hołowczyce, Stare Siołkowice, Stare Topczewo, Stara Różanka, Stary Kobylin). Perhaps "Stary Kobylin", but every of this villages has at least one windmill. "Upadek" means "collapse" and it is not a name of village.
Ps. "wiatrak" means "windmill". Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 21:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Union Mill Complex

Thanks. I'll probably be getting back to this at some point in the future. Daniel Case (talk) 19:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


Infobox windmill

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Pigsonthewing's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mill Green

It seemed to me the best decision is that if the other name is also used then the name should be that. The one in Hatfield does not have an alternative name whereas the one in Fryerning does seem to. They are both linked from a disambiguation page i created. You can name the one in Hatfield to that to show where it islocated. See Mill Green. Simply south (talk) 15:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Treadwheel crane

Hello Mjroots, Thank you for the time and brainpower that you put into making Wikipedia a powerful educational tool! I'd like to link the Treadmill Crane wiki with the current French 'Cage à l'écureuil' wiki. I can't figure out for the life of me how to do it!

It does seem that it should be called a Treadwheel crane as opposed to Treadmill. It is also called a squirrel cage at the Guedelon site. A few English catellogie sites seem to use the direct translation from the French as well. Kindest Regards, Marie Reed (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Good morning mjroots. Thank you for your kind support. I have quite a bit to learn when it comes too editing articles! I'm very grateful for your tips, guidance, and continued communication. I'll be expanding the article over the next few days.

I had a question about images. I added a France catergory to the main Treadwheel page. The added photo doesn't seem to want to thumbnail down. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. It should be smaller than it is on the page!

Kindest Regards, --Marie Reed (talk) 07:55, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Upminster Windmill

Thanks for pointing that out. When I looked earlier I didn't get the EMI link on youtube and removed it because of possible copyright. I've reverted back so that the link is there. It's unfortunate but neither The Assembly or Never Never (The Assembly song) mentions where the video was recorded. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 22:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Polish Windmills

The word "nieznany" means "unknown". "Stan" is condition. The list can be split by Vovoidship, good idea. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 12:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Beam pump

Hi there. WT:GM recommended I ask you, I wondered if you'd be interested in this? I'm currently trying to drum up support so it can be restored and preserved in situ, and wondered if you knew anyone who might be interested. The pump is at Radcliffe, Greater Manchester. Parrot of Doom 20:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I have now, thanks :) Parrot of Doom 21:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)>

Paltro[c]k mill

Sorry, we both edited at the same time so my expansion includes the Paltrock spelling. I used this because the English reference I was using spelt it that way. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not too fussed about the spelling. My main aim is to translate the German wiki article on the de:Internationales Wind- und Wassermühlen-Museum which is home to one of these mills. If you are a mill expert, it would be great if you could scan the article when it's ready for any errors. Regards. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Mills Project

Thanks for letting me konw. My main focus currently is translating German articles on railways and the area I live in - Lower Saxony. But mills sound interesting - if there are any German mill articles worth adding I'm happy to give it a go - Sansoucci mill may be a start. I may also look out for mills to photograph. --Bermicourt (talk) 13:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

International Wind- and Watermill Museum

I've just completed translation of the above article. It needs a second eye casting over it and probably more links. It would be good for a DYK, but the original gives no in-line references so it would probably fail. Cheers. --Bermicourt (talk) 14:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Lower Saxon Mill Road

Just added this article as well. Grateful if you could cast an expert eye over it if you have time. It is referenced so might be a candidate for a DYK. Don't worry I'm giving translation of mill articles a rest for a bit! --Bermicourt (talk) 21:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Waterhall Mill, Patcham

Hi. Yes, Patcham is right per all sources; the IP is notionally right in that it happens to be closer to present-day Westdene than present-day Patcham, but the fact remains that it was built long before Westdene was built within the old parish of Patcham, as Patcham's windmill. I've put some more details on the talk page, and have added an explicit ref to the lead. (I probably didn't help matters by putting a paragraph about the mill in the Westdene article when I wrote it!) Best regards, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 21:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Goole Fields

Hi, as you have created the list articles for mills you may be the best person to answer this. I have just spotted Goole Fields mill on Geograph and there appears to be no entry in List of windmills in the East Riding of Yorkshire. Is this an omission or is it really called something else? Keith D (talk) 01:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Textile mill progress

Just to up date you. I have these two templates, that sum up progress and what needs to done. In the first you can pick up the company histories and a lists of lists of textile mills. In the second you can see the progress on individual later mills.

Yes, I'm still upright and breathing.--ClemRutter (talk) 14:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe that Yates of Blackburn was a predecessor to Yates & Thom; and that the latter subsequently became Foster, Yates & Thom. Their factory was on both sides of Manner Sutton Street (at the Eanam end). I remember that there was something resembling a bridge across the street, connecting the two buildings, which may have been some sort of housing for pipes or ducts. This was painted a dark colour - whether black, grey or blue I don't recall - but with the FYT logo in yellow. A few years ago I bought a Corgi "Dibnah's Choice" model steam traction engine and low-loader; the latter carries a Lancashire boiler painted black, with "YATES & THOM LTD. BLACKBURN" in white. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I have copied my above post to Talk:Yates and Thom. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

De Rat, IJlst

You said: AFAIK, one doesn't need to supply a source for a translation. The European Water Vole article has a Dutch equivalent nl:woelrat, whict states in the lede De woelrat of waterrat (The Woelrat(modern spelling) or Water rat). Mjroots (talk) 17:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't mean to ask a source for the translation, but of the name itself. Why did they name a mill after a water rat? The the original owner have one as a pet? Did the superstitious builders disturb the nest of one during the construction?--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination for De Hoop, Holwerd

  Hello! Your submission of De Hoop, Holwerd 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! Mikenorton (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

100 mills

Hi Mjroots, congratulations with 100 mill articles about dutch windmills on en-wikipedia. At least counted from the interwiki's to 'en' on the dutch wikipedia here. (number 100 will show up this night.) Akoopal (talk) 20:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I know you didn't do all. Still you created number 100 :-) Always nice to mention milestones. Akoopal (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK hook for Lille Mølle

Yeah, I saw that. Your comment was a little ambiguous, did you mean you can speak Danish? If you've read the source yourself, I think we could AGF the hook, it's a pretty simple hook and there's not much chance you might have misread it. Gatoclass (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, look, I'm afraid I can't spend any more time reviewing hooks tonight, I was going to quit 45 minutes ago but then had to respond to a couple of queries. If someone else hasn't reviewed it by then, I'll run it through Google translate myself tomorrow. Gatoclass (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

List of United Kingdom windmills on Dutch Wikipedia

Hey Mjroots, I was wondering when you had planned to start the article as written above on the Dutch wiki, so that I can improve the article on your sand box even further. Thanks in advance! Casperinfo (talk) 12:41, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I will start editing shortly.

Casperinfo (talk) 23:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Paltrock- und Bockwindmühlen Langerwisch

Hi Mjroots, please have a look at de:Paltrock- und Bockwindmühlen Langerwisch. Regards -- Beaverbear (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

West Mill @ Regency Square, Brighton

Hi Mj. All the sources I'm consulting at the moment say it was a post mill, but the New Encyclopaedia of Brighton intriguingly says it "may have been rebuilt in 1762". (But with no more detail than that!) I've added as much as I can about the mill in the History paragraph; do add further info if you can. For the narrative flow, it may be better to keep it as part of the History section rather than creating a separate subsection. I'll be editing the article for the next ~3 hours, then will resume tomorrow sometime. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

That's probably the same picture as I have in the Dale book (Fashionable Brighton 1820–1860). I'm logging off now for the evening, so there's no danger of any edit conflicts if you want to add any more. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I've come to the conclusion that Hemming got the mill type wrong, there was no smock mill. I've rewritten the bit about the windmill. There may have been two mills on the site; the first was there in 1744 but may have gone by 1762, with another having been built by 1765 and moved in 1797 - either that, or Ogilby missed the mill and there was a mill on site continuously from 1744-97. Anyway, it's covered in the text. One thing with the ref, how do you get an ISSN to show? Mjroots (talk) 05:57, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for adding those bits. I've fixed the ISSN by putting it in the |id= field and prefixing it with an {{ISSN}} template (diff). Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 07:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
If it's got an ISSN but no ISBN, that suggests a periodical not a book, so wouldn't {{cite journal}} be better? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

H.S. Pledge & Sons Ltd.

Thank you for updating the H.S.Pledge and Sons Ltd section. I must inform you that I am the new director of the company and the company is no longer defunct. Feel free to ask me questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mforceuk (talkcontribs) 20:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Dablink

Sorry about that. Good catch. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 08:46, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


The only time I am removing (or changing) a year is when the article does not support that year. Apparently this happens more often then I expected. Per your comment, apparently windmills and lighthouses have issues here. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Mill problem

Hi, I have just come across a new mill image File:Goole, Shuffleton Windmill, Hook Road - - 178573.jpg, while sorting the new Geograph uploads to Commons, that does not appear to be in the List of windmills in the East Riding of Yorkshire article. Is this another mill or is it there under a different name. Many thanks. Keith D (talk) 12:28, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Windmills in Chatham

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Clankypup's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Medway, etc,

Trouble with your segregating this page by subject - this comment covers two sections! Please check the definitive source of the Medway. I think that someone thinks it starts in the Mole basin! Please check: Medway watermills (upper tributaries), River Medway and Template:River Medway map. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:25, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing. Now, before I get carried away and start doing bulk changes, please review my recent edits to windmill articles and approve them (or possibly disapprove). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Oxted mills

I've given you a namecheck in a conversation on my talk page. --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for carrying that new stuff over to Medway watermills (upper tributaries). I've just come to do it, and there it was done! --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:42, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

List of windmills in Poland

In the list, the entry for Ciechanowiec in Podlaskie has the picture for Ciechocinek in Kuyavian-Pomeranian, which is missing from the list. Check the picture legend and this site for confirmation: [1] Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 00:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Pantigo Windmill

Thanks for your efforts on that Pantigo windmill photo. I uploaded it, but it must be haunted. :-) Probably not surprising for a windmill. In any case, let's hope we can get it righted. Best, MarmadukePercy (talk) 06:09, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks! MarmadukePercy (talk) 06:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Marsh Mill

Hi, thanks for adding to Marsh Mill. I was hoping someone who knows about windmills would come along and fill in the infobox. I didn't expect it to be so quick! :) --BelovedFreak 16:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK hook looks good, thanks. --BelovedFreak 16:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Online sources

Hello, do you know anything about the relibility (or otherwise) of a website called Engineering Timelines ( Are there any other online sources for windmills that are considered reliable? Thanks, --BelovedFreak 10:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Little Marton Mill in Blackpool. I've got a few sources, but far more scanty than what there was for Marsh Mill. The page is [2]. --BelovedFreak 10:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I had looked at one of the Clarke books in the library, but it didn't mention Marsh Mill or Little Marton. I didn't realise there were two more though, so I'll keep an eye out! --BelovedFreak 10:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Bank Hall windmill, Bretherton, Lancashire image

Hi Michael. The picture you added (though it's a dreadful resolution scan) is one of the Donald Muggeridge photos, so probably ought not to be on here. I could probably email you some rather better, and out of copyright, Lancs and Cheshire images? Ghughesarch (talk) 11:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

WP Mills assessment backlog

When I am feeling in the right mood- and I have an evening to spare. I want to start to get rid of the un-assessed backlog. As about 75 of the articles are mine- I thought I would check first. For importance, I will use the simple scheme- of only local importance (low)- regional (mid) international interest (high)- leaving top importance to generic topics such as Drainage of the Fenlands.

For quality- no infobox but some structure -start. Properly formed/ geotagged/referenced/ but missing sections -- C. (satisfy the casual reader). All of that, but something in each section- inline ref for each section/ illustrated --B. Almost all my work is at C. ( feel free to flatter at this point! Or reassess upwards ).

Are you happy with this?--ClemRutter (talk) 16:45, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Great Mill, Sheerness

The problem with Category:yyyy architecture is that it is completely ambiguous. What does it mean exactly? Is it the start of design, the approval of a design, the beginning of construction, the end of construction (which is what about 95% of the contents where actually for) or even the approval of a design concept? This is why most of these articles have been moved to subcategories that have objective inclusion criteria. The objections are pretty much from two users. One who does not believe that a building is ever completed and another who I think does not like categories on redirects. This move to completed in started with the bridge articles. So, yes, I believe that the removal is correct. If we know design dates (again, start, finish or another stage must be clear), then subcategories for this can be added. But I'll ask, what is the design date for One World Trade Center? Is it the start of design or the beginning of construction? It can't be the end of design since they are still designing the curtain wall area of the lower 20 floors since the initial design, as I understand it, was not buildable as designed. So if you can create additional subcategories that have objective criteria for inclusion, feel free to add them. 19:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Holgate Windmill

Re [3]: I'm glad to hear this! I'm up in York for Christmas, so I'll try and get over there sometime for an up-to-date photo. Have a good Christmas!  An optimist on the run! 18:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Follow up - I had a very fortuitous trip out to see it this afternoon. Althoguh it wasn't officially open to the public today, the vice chairman of the restoration society was just locking up when I got there, and was quite happy to show myself an some other people around, so I got photos inside as well. Now uploaded, and new category created.  An optimist on the run! 15:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Windmill in War Horse film

Hello Mjroots. I see you are a windmill expert. I have done some work on the locations for War Horse (film), and wonder if you could identify the windmill (?post mill) in the trailer? It appears at 1:29 trailer on YouTube. It's definitely in the UK as all location filming was done there; more than that I know not. I'm assuming it's not a built set as it would surely be cheaper to film at an existing one rather than build one. I know I'd have to find a RS to back up any identification information before putting it into the article, but if you can identify it, it might help me narrow down my search for suitable articles! Thanks Stronach (talk) 14:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh I had assumed not because Speilberg had said that the only CGI in the film was in a trench warfare scene with a horse, for its safety. Stronach (talk) 15:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Pretty sure it's CGI; the spars for the sails don't line up properly, but are staggered, and the postmill is too close to the trees. It's also rotating a bit quick considering the state of the sails, and the body of the mill isn't weatherboarded, the surrounding ground doesn't have a circular track where the miller would walk as he rotated the mill. The obturation of the field guns is woefully defective (note the explosion of smoke beneath each gun as it fires). The main street in the cardboard version of Lower Slaughter is too narrow. The MG08s are firing too slowly- the belt in the foreground doesn't seem to move up into the gun. The stahlhelms aren't camouflaged. Ning-ning (talk) 16:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Flicked through a copy of "War Horse, the making of the motion picture" yesterday and it's clear from the photographs that it is "real", in the sense of being a full-sized 3-dimensional physical object, albeit a set for the film, the "tail" ladder runs up to a door in the side of the mill. The text says it was built on the Stratfield Saye estate. Ghughesarch (talk) 15:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Translation for stichting?

What would be the best translation for Stichting De Fryske Mole? Most dictionaries say foundation, however in most Frisian windmill-related articles here it is translated as Frisian Mills Society. Trust would not be correct but I think is the British analogue to the Dutch stichting. My suggestion would be Frisian Mills Foundation. Reboelje (talk) 14:33, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'List of windmills in Loire-Atlantique'

Hi. I tried to fix the dead links in 'List of windmills in Loire-Atlantique', but there was one that I couldn't fix. I marked it with {{Dead link}}. Can you help fix the last dead link?


  • You added this in July 2008.
  • I tried to load this link on 23 March, 25 March, 27 March and today, but it never worked.
  • I looked in The Wayback Machine and WebCite but I couldn't find a suitable replacement.

Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots |deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 08:17, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

  Fixed Mjroots (talk) 08:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Montefiore Windmill

Maybe I will ask Dijkstra to upload a picture to commons, once he is back home and has had a chance to cool down (his employee calls the working conditions inhuman because of the the heat :D ). I'm also hoping for someone to write an article in the windmill literature so we can use that as source and clean up the probably short lived refs to local newspapers etc. Reboelje (talk) 19:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


Hi Mjroots, heb jij tijd/zin om een vertaling danwel nieuw artikel te maken over nl:Goliath (molen), dit omdat een serie over de molen heeft gewonnen in de documentaire-prijs van Wiki Loves Monuments, en de foto van de molen zelf ook in de top 10 van beste foto's staat? Akoopal (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Het Pink

Hi Mjroots, nog een vertaalverzoekje, ik wil op mijn molen een QR-pedia code gaan zetten, daarvoor zou het erg helpen een engels artikel te hebben over nl:Het Pink. Is dat iets waar jij tijd voor hebt? Zo niet laat het ook weten natuurlijk. Akoopal (talk) 13:21, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Windmill Engines

You've said Oil engines in the infobox for some of these, but Wikipedia has a number of these, It would be appreciated if you could disambing this. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:07, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk of the devil and. he will hear about it

Nice to hear from you mjroots. I have not been on WP much these last couple of years. I imagine you know Peter Horn anyway, he does a lot of railway stuff, but as you see I was just putting in a good word for you.

Some of the convert stuff was going to move to Wikimedia into the parsing engine, but I have no idea what became of that. The little I do on Wikipedia is mostly gnoming, nowadays.

I was thinking of you just today as it happens, before even looking at your user page etc, about the post mill at West Wratting owned by David and Gabrielle. I was just passing through the hills here around Mende, Hungary and they are similar to the hills around there and thought, I told mjroots David owned that post mill but couldn't remember his wife's name. It's been in her family four generations and on the centenery of ownership we looked around it. Most of the machinery is repairable but the mill is not in working order, the building is OK. I imagine if it were working, the top of the sail would be the highest point in Cambridgeshire. (OS is 120m above sea level; Gog Magogs are at 130m I think). Si Trew (talk) 21:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

It would almost certainly be the highest windmill in Cambridgeshire even without the sail, but that't not very notable, especially if it doesn't work. (Of course, most windmills in Cambs. were for drainage.) But I can certainly get more info from David and Gabbie if you want to add it to your list. Si Trew (talk) 22:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Medway watermills/Diagram listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Medway watermills/Diagram. Since you had some involvement with the Medway watermills/Diagram redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). John Vandenberg (chat) 14:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Buttrum's Mill, Woodbridge

I don't find it hard to guess which terms would be explained in the other article, and the note at the top of the section makes that article easy to access. Maybe it's different in longer articles, but in a one-paragraph section I don't think they're necessary. It's not something I want to argue over, and you can format the article however you want, but twelve italicized words or phrases in six sentences seem likely to distract the reader. A. Parrot (talk) 08:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

De Kievit, Menaldum


This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of De Kievit, Menaldum, and it appears to include material copied directly from,_Dronrijp.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:09, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@Coren: - Material which is entirely sourced from the Wikipedia article that I created on De Poelen, Dronrijp. Mjroots (talk) 22:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Windmills in Bedfordshire

Category:Windmills in Bedfordshire, which you created, has been nominated for dual upmerging into Category:Buildings and structures in Bedfordshire and Category:Windmills in England. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:09, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

There's actually a dozen articles in the nomination but you only created one of them.RevelationDirect (talk) 01:09, 10 October 2014 (UTC)


A corn mill would clearly be industrial, or better as agricultural which we don't have established as a tree yet. A drainage mill could be agricultural or infrastructure or maybe both. It would likely depend on the use and the quality of the article. I don't think we can automatically include a parent windmill category as agricultural, or industrial of infrastructure. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Balancing pockets on burr stones

Hi, I've just been adding some stuff to Stembridge Mill, High Ham (in the hope of getting it to GA standard). This source says it "retains two pairs of French burr stones (having Clark and Dunham 1859 patent balancing pockets)". I've put this into the article but I don't really understand what "balancing pockets" are. Any ideas?— Rod talk 14:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Rodw: Stembridge Mill at Historic England; Narborough Mill at Norfolk Mills; Little Salkeld Mill at Geography Department, Portsmouth University . --Redrose64 (talk) 16:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, but although Historic England says " balance weight pockets let into plaster backs", I'm really no wiser what balance weight pockets" are?— Rod talk 16:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
French burr stones. Balancing pockets at 12, 4 and 8 o'clock positions.
@Rodw: French Burr stones need to be balanced , much the same as a car tyre does. These stones have a layer of Plaster of Paris several inches thick. Three or four cast iron balancing boxes are let into the top of the millstone. Balancing is achieved by pouring molten lead into the boxes: If a bit too much is added, the excess can be scraped away to fine tune the balance. The pair shown is from a watermill in Oxfordshire, but it's exactly the same in a windmill, although slightly more crucial due to the fact that a constant milling speed is easily achievable in a watermill, but not so in a windmill. Mjroots (talk) 18:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I now understand. Do you think any of that needs adding to Stembidge Mill, or alternatively is there an article I could link the phrase to, or alternatively should I just leave it & assume everyone else apart from me will understand what it means?— Rod talk 18:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
@Rodw: I'd stick to the "two pairs of French Burr stones" line. Good luck with the GA. If you need any help let me know. Mjroots (talk) 19:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
OK I've taken out the balancing pockets bit. If you wanted to take a look & see if you think there is anything else needed (particularly as it is "a bit short" and I can't find anything further) that would be great.— Rod talk 19:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
@Rodw: - I've added a bit more history. Will add millers and a description section later this evening. Take a look at Thelnetham Windmill, which is a GA, might give you some ideas. Mjroots (talk) 11:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits so far although I'm unsure about the dab link to George Parker as none of the possibles seem to match a miller in the late Victorian era. I will have a read of Thelnetham Windmill.— Rod talk 16:27, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
@Rodw: - Unlinked GP, not a wikinotable person. Have added the other two sections, feel free to improve. Mjroots (talk) 20:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help with this. Is "winded" a specialist term in "It is winded by a wheel and chain" or can I change it to wound?— Rod talk 20:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
{[reply to|Rodw}} it's "winded", meaning "turned to face the wind", not the past participle of "to wind" (as in clock). Wiktionary is lacking atm, will see what I can do about that! Mjroots (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Northern Rail talk page

Hi there. I have a suspicion on that page the same person has used two accounts to make it look like more people support their argument. What raised my suspicion is that both users have a near identical contributions list in terms of what pages they edit - Epm-84 (Contribs) and Hstudent (Contribs). I understand from another user I get on with and has advised me on this situation that in certain aspects having two accounts can be alright - but surely having two accounts and using both of these to try and add more support to your argument isn't allowed? I don't think it would be very fair either

I don't like making accusations but I think given the circumstances and the similarity in contributions on both accounts - it could well be the same person. The same user has also got problems in accepting any revision of the fleetlist except his own - which myself and another user on that talk page disagree with. Both myself and User:D47817 voted for the removal of the information Epm-84 inserted to the fleetlist (seating capacity variations per unit) and for it to be included on the individual unit articles instead. I am willing to bet however as soon as I get around to doing that Epm-84 will again accuse me of vandalism and re-instate it! - Coradia175 (talk) 14:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

@Coradia175: Yes, having two accounts is permissible in certain circumstances. I've got Mjroots2 (talk · contribs) which I use when in public libraries etc so that the password to this account doesn't get compromised. However, what you are talking about in this instance appears to be sockpuppetry (or possibly Meatpuppetry), which is not allowed. You could file a report at WP:SPI if you wish the matter to be looked into. Mjroots (talk) 14:57, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Thanks for your help. I've filed a report here - I've supplied as much evidence as I can. It appears it isn't the first time said user has been involved in sockpuppetry accusations - this link (Section You and user:Sheliaval) shows at least two users who suspect Sheliaval and Hstudent of being the same person - and the argument put forward by Sheliaval in my view wasn't very convincing. I've mentioned that in my report as well - Cheers Coradia175 (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Stembridge Mill, High Ham GA review

As you may have spotted Stembridge Mill, High Ham is being reviewed at Talk:Stembridge Mill, High Ham/GA1. The reviewer has suggested removing the whole of the "Machinery" section and made various comments about the list of millers. I believe you wrote/rewrote most of these sections and I wondered if you had any comments?— Rod talk 15:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Irish Windmills

Thank you for noticing my edit to the List of windmills in Ireland - I'm very interested in increasing the coverage of these structures in Ireland. Many of them are National Monuments, which is how I came across them at first. I've started with Vinegar Hill Windmill, although I can find no information on the mill when it was operational. I don't have a huge amount of knowledge on the technical side of milling, so if you notice any of my articles appearing, forgive any lack of technical detail! Next on my list might be the Elphin Windmill. Although so far the only resource I have is a book, Irish Flour Milling: A History 600-2000, which might be a bit limited. Thanks again! Smirkybec (talk) 12:31, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

List of windmills in Kent

There is a convert problem in List of windmills in Kent. Searching for "convert:" (with the colon) finds a problem due to {{convert|1|fulong|m}} (typo for "furlong"). I was going to fix that, but I noticed a bigger problem due to convert being rather dumb. The following two converts illustrate the issue. The first is what is currently present (there are several like this); it is broken. The second shows a workaround I just created (uppercase "M" in "Mi"):

  • {{convert|1|mi|5|furlong|km}} → 1 mile 5 furlongs (2.6 km)
  • {{convert|1|Mi|5|furlong|km}} → 1 Mi[convert: unknown unit]

The first convert fails because mi is not defined as having furlong as a subdivision. That makes it interpret the 5 as the number of decimal places of rounding, and the furlong and km are then ignored because the convert is finished. The default output for mi is km, so it shows km anyway. Convert is very complex and it's not easy to fix the broken behavior. I can't fix the mi unit at the moment, so I added Mi. It will probably be a long time (a couple of months) before I manage to issue another convert release. That will fix mi to work with furlong. At that time I will notice where Mi is used and will edit the article to replace it with mi.

What all that means is as follows. Please fix the "fulong" typo, and change "mi" to "Mi" in each of the following:


You can also use "Mi" in the other converts if wanted. I thought it would be better to explain all this and get you to do it when ready. Johnuniq (talk) 10:31, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Johnuniq: OK, thanks for that, will fix. Mjroots (talk) 10:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
@Johnuniq: as horse races in the UK are expressed in miles and furlongs, it might be worth dropping a note at the talk page of the Wikiproject explaining the situation. Mjroots (talk) 10:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, but maybe later. If they have been using miles/furlongs for a while, someone would have noticed that it wasn't working, but no one has brought it up at Template talk:Convert. By the way, I notice that {{convert|1|mi|furlong|km}} above is missing the number of furlongs. Convert handles ranges and composite units (like miles/chains/yards/feet), and more, and that makes detecting an obvious mistake difficult—convert stops looking at the parameters once it has what it thinks is enough. Johnuniq (talk) 10:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
That was an error, it has been corrected to 1 mile 2 furlongs. Mjroots (talk) 11:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Mjroots/Archive/Mills".