Open main menu
Please click here to leave me a new message.
  1. April 2006
  2. May 2006 – June 2006
  3. July 2006 – August 2006
  4. September 2006 – 2007
  5. 2007 – 2010


? map of Somerset LevelsEdit

Hi, With your mapping expertise I'd like to ask if an area map is possible. I've been doing some work on Somerset Levels and would like to put it up for FAC soon. At the peer review a map was requested. As it's not a county/administrative district I didn't know whether it would be possible to do a shaded map or something showing the area covered, perhaps on a Somerset or SW England map?— Rod talk 20:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Your quick hack is brilliant. I have no idea how you did it but think it really helps. Labels showing the major rivers (eg River Parrett, Axe & Brue), Bristol Channel, hills (Polden Hills, Mendip Hills & Quantock Hills) & major settlements (eg Bridgwater, Burnham-on-Sea, Cheddar, Glastonbury & Wells ) would be great but it might get a bit cluttered. Someone else did File:Mendip Hills Map.png for me when I put that one up for FA some time ago. I'm always really grateful when people are willing to contribute skills I don't have to make wp articles better.— Rod talk 09:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
It looks great. Are you happy for me to put it on the article where others will see it (& hopefully contribute to any discussion about development)? My only thought is about the brown lines - they look to me as if they are divisions between local authority districts? but this would not be clear to anyone who doesn't know the area & probably aren't that relevant for a geography article.— Rod talk 17:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your ongoing work on this - could we add markers for a few of the major settlements eg Glastonbury, Bridgwater, Cheddar, Burnham-on-Sea - there are others but any more would probably overload the map.— Rod talk 08:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Looks great to me - I'm just waiting for some more page numbers (books coming from the library) & then plan to put Somerset Levels up at FAC.— Rod talk 11:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the insert I will comment on the FAC to see if that is what the reviewer wanted or whether it is a locator map. I can't find a suitable infobox as the Levels are not a protected area in the same way that Exmoor or the Mendip Hills are.— Rod talk 08:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if you are watching the FAC but another reviwer, while describing the map as useful, has suggested: "but doesn't show many of the features and places mentioned in the article, nor does it show the area of the levels -one shade of green is clearly the lowest land but it is not stated what the maximum height is of this colour and therefore whether this coincides with the levels." Could you add a key of the heights represented by the colours & I will ask for clarification of what "other features" are needed without cluttering the map.— Rod talk 18:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. The profile PDF is already in the article (used several times). On this map the built up areas are useful - what is the yellow are? Did you also spot the request on the FAC to include the M5 motorway?— Rod talk 12:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Would you be willing to add your comment about the significance of the M5 on the FAC?— Rod talk 13:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Another reviewer at the FAC has pointed out a typo on the map "Polern Hills" should be "Polden Hills" I should have spotted this earlier. Would it be possible to change that? The same reviewer is arguing for the inclusion of a lot more of the settlements - would you be able to add some or respond to the comments on the FAC?— Rod talk 09:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Maps of French départementsEdit

Hi, I#'ve seen the good work that you did for GB counties - have you any knowledge of French départements which could be used to generate a location map? The specific requirement is for a SVG equivalent of File:Pas-de-Calais department location map.jpg in the same style as File:Cotes-dArmor department location map.svg. Please comment at User talk:Mjroots#Re:A request. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

York againEdit

Hi, and thanks for the useful information. Sorry to bother you again. The previous map showing the York UA within England looked sort of OK because the red blob on the map was so small, but the current one gives the problem that I was complaining about, essentially because the UA looks so big and doesn't pinpoint York itself. I've tried experimenting by inserting (as you suggested) Template:Location map United Kingdom North Yorkshire with and without the brackets into the York infobox - no luck. Then I had a look at Harrogate, and the map looks just what York needs, but I couldn't find the UK N Yorks map file in the HG infobox - have I missed something? Then I noticed that the Harrogate infobox is Infobox UK place whereas the York one is Infobox settlement - what is going on here? Aargh! I've actually had a tiny bit of experience with these maps, having used Infobox church a few times and succeeded in getting the right map and using the coordinates to get the location blob in the right place (e.g. St Luke's Church, Oseney Crescent), but now I'm baffled. BTW, I had a look at a few other articles using Infobox settlements, e.g. Leicester, and the "location within England" map is a .svg and (to my eyes) looks horrific (apologies if you created it!). I'd be very grateful if you could give me an idiot's guide to putting a Harrogate-style map in the York infobox. TIA. --GuillaumeTell 21:46, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Great! Thanks! And I noticed that the magic word "pushpin" (as used in my St Luke's map) has made an appearance, which made my day (er, night). As for Template documentation, there's an awful lot of Wikipedia back-office stuff that seems to have been written by computer people for computer people, which makes my eyes glaze over, so even apparently simple things like WP:DYK are swathed in mystery and easy to get wrong. As a sort of old-fashioned computer person, I'm not afraid of experimenting (and am probably the #1 user of the "Show preview" button), but sometimes I just give up. Feel free to cite me as a witness if you're going to try to tidy up all these subtly different infoboxes and templates and maps (aka lions and tigers and bears). Whew! Best. --GuillaumeTell 23:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
PS: I forgot to say that I agree that your idea of a map showing the urban area of York within the UA would indeed be useful as a supplementary image in the article, but it's not a matter of any urgency. It'll look somewhat different from the Manchester one, of course (no bad thing). --GuillaumeTell 23:50, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Fylde mapEdit

Hi, Thanks for the great maps and instructions you have provided at User:Nilfanion/Elections. I have created a couple for Blackpool elections (for 2003 and 2007, as you did the 2011 one) which went ok, however when I created this map - File:Fylde UK local election 2003 map.svg - for the Fylde 2003 election it shows the wards won by independents as black, rather than the grey shown on the thumbnail image, as seen at Fylde Council election, 2003. I wondered if you knew why it showed as black rather than grey and what I had done wrong? I set the colour as #dddddd as you did on the Bournemouth map for the independent. Davewild (talk) 20:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks like the map File:Fylde UK local election 2003 map.svg has fixed itself as you said it might. Thanks for checking it a couple of days ago. Davewild (talk) 17:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I've created many of these articles on local elections over the last few years and always wanted to create maps for them, but only with your instructions, which made the process easy have I been able to. Reference your points, I will start using the LibDem colour as updated and have added the Election Maps of the United Kingdom category to the maps I have created so far (and will use it on new ones I add).
Reference the boundary changes I am aware about the boundary changes and am keeping strictly to elections which still use the same boundaries as 2010. Luckily the BBC always states in it's report of the election results for each council, whether boundary changes have taken place or not (e.g. here from the BBC for my latest map on Amber Valley in 2000). So for instance Amber Valley is still on the same boundaries for the local council as in 2000, while in Adur the current boundaries only go back as far as 2004 - as per BBC here - so my earliest map I have done for Adur is 2004. Davewild (talk) 17:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


Hello, Nilfanion. You have new messages at Redrose64's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Redrose64 (talk) 07:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

London mapsEdit

That's awesome, thanks for uploading them. Have already started creating maps from them! Davewild (talk) 17:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


Hi, this is miles better than that. Well done! Are all district council maps gettinga similar update? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:35, 2 August 2011

Short version is yes all the districts will get similar updates. SW England and SE England have the full set of maps now, the rest should be done over this month. The slight complication is I'm doing like-for-like swaps, and some articles use maps that don't quite match up with that.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Bespoke SVG mapsEdit

An editor has suggested that the SVG locator maps should have the marker preserved on enlargement of the map. Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#SVG Maps and comment there. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: MapsEdit

Hey, thanks for the reply. If you search for the Preston council election article for 2011, you'll see my handywork. The manual upload worked for me, so hopefully all the citations and copyright is how it should be.

They are very good maps and really useful. I'll just stick to using them for Preston - not too many parties, easier to fill in :)

Speak soon doktorb wordsdeeds 11:11, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Additional mapsEdit

Thanks for pointing out the county council maps, I hadn't realised you had made those available and hopefully will get round to using those on particular elections soon.

As to larger area maps I would certainly enjoy looking at them personally and maps based on the counties and metropolitan counties would be good if you understand what I mean - e.g. if you scroll down on this link here you will see a series of maps showing the ward results for all seats in West Yorkshire (including Leeds, Bradford, Kirklees etc. in one map for elections between 1986 and 2008. You could do the same thing for all of the districts making up Lancashire, Norfolk etc. That sort of map would be fun, but the problem is at the moment I can't think how to fit them in on any particular articles on wikipedia!

Doing one for the whole of England would be awesome and would fit on the particular years local elections article - e.g United Kingdom local elections, 2011, but I would think it would be a very big task to create (a lot of wards!) and not sure how much detail you would be able to see at that level? Davewild (talk) 19:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


Hello, Nilfanion. You have new messages at Dr Greg's talk page.
Message added 21:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Dr Greg  talk  21:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)


Hello, Nilfanion. You have new messages at Dr Greg's talk page.
Message added 19:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Dr Greg  talk  19:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


Hello, Nilfanion. You have new messages at Dr Greg's talk page.
Message added 22:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Note: if you have my talk page on your watchlist and don't need these talkbacks, let me know and I'll stop sending them.  Dr Greg  talk  22:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Infobox map of InvernessEdit

Hi Nilfanion. A problem is arising with the default map selection on Template:Infobox UK place for locations in the Inverness lieutenancy. The map defaults to File:Inverness UK location map.svg, which shows the Inverness city management area. However, as shown at Alvie, some places are not in that management area. Alvie, for example, is in the area covered by File:Badenoch and Strathspey UK location map.svg.

I understand the reason for going for area maps, rather than a map of the council area (Highland is very large). However, the default needs to link to maps of each lieutenancy, rather than to ward or city management area maps. Alternatively, the default could link to maps of the former districts, though I'm not sure how that could work as the default is now determined by the lieutenancy.

In the case of Highland, the breakdown is as follows:

Hope you can help in sorting out. Skinsmoke (talk) 15:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

The maps were uploaded to a request a while back (Highland is big and should be broken down etc). See this thread: Template talk:Infobox UK place/Archive 12#Caithness map. I did mention at the time it is not the Lieutenancy areas, but the ward management areas.
The biggest problem really is the data is for the current administrative divisions. There were several boundary changes for the wards in 2007. While the older wards did align with the lieutenancy areas, that's no longer the case, and I don't have data that would let me construct the lieutenancy borders. This lack of data makes it extremely difficult to create "correct" maps for the lieutenancies. For instance, Morven is definitely in Caithness, but is outside the current Caithness wards.
Probably the best thing to do would be to disable the auto-selection of the area maps, and default to the Highland map. If this was backed up by adding it to a category for manual addition of an area map, then this would avoid issues of bad map selection. This would avoid errors like the one you reported for Alvie.--Nilfanion (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Police areas mapEdit

I notice that an anonymous editor ( has used {{Mapereq}} at Talk:Police area#Map to request a map of UK police areas. I thought I'd leave a message here in case you can assist, by combining your OS OpenData SVG maps of counties, unitary areas, Greater London and the City of London. — Richardguk (talk) 20:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for creating File:United_Kingdom_police_areas_map.svg. I've updated the article accordingly. — Richardguk (talk) 14:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

London mapsEdit

Will gradually introduce them to the articles, thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

MSU InterviewEdit

Dear Nilfanion,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.


Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Use of maps in weather textbookEdit

Good evening Nilfanion,

    My name is Lauren Miller and I am a photo researcher Jones & Bartlett Learning, a textbook publishing company. I am currently working on a title about Louisiana Weather and Climate and the author would like to use several maps of hurricane tracks that you have loaded to wikipedia. I wish to confirm that you have released these maps into the public domain. The maps I wish to use are as follows:
  1. 1893_Chenier_Caminanda_hurricane_track
  2. 1900_Galveston_hurricane_track
  3. 1947_Fort_Lauderdale_hurricane_track
  4. 1947_Fort_Lauderdale_hurricane_track
  5. Audrey_1957_track
  6. Camille_1969_track
  7. Betsy_1965_track
  8. Juan_1985_track

Thank you for your time and I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.

Kind regards, Lauren Miller Permissions and Photo Research Associate Jones & Bartlett lEARNING — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have placed all of the files that you have listed above in the public domain. The same is true for all similar files I have created and uploaded here. One request is that I would appreciate it if you can advise me of the book's title when it is published. If there's anything, further I'll do my best to help.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for responding to my inquiry. The book is titled Louisiana Weather and Climate by Robert Rohli and Anthony Vega. Is there any particular way you would like to be credited for your images? Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I have no particular preference as to how you credit me - either to my username or just Wikipedia / Wikimedia is fine. If you'd prefer to credit in a different way I suggest you contact me by email (my username at to discuss further.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:43, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Sheffield historical wards mapEdit

Moved to the correct place. HeadlightMorning (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I see you've created some excellent maps of each of the Counties. However, I can't see where these have come from in the OS Boundaryline dataset. For instance, for there are 5 districts and 2 unitaries matching 'somerset' but not a single county as you have shown. Would you be able to clarify how that county-wide boundary was made? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvl22 (talkcontribs) 10:54, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Its a straightforward exercise to extract the ceremonial counties from the Boundary-Line data.
  1. Select the desired elements in GIS, and export those polygons to SVG paths.
  2. Using an SVG program such as Inkscape, combine the SVG paths into a single path (using the "union" feature).
It would also possible to merge the polygons in the GIS package, before exporting; I prefer to do it after export to ensure I retain the original GIS data.
The only complication is splitting Stockton-on-Tees, but that can be done by splitting along the River Tees. As a final (lossy) step I generally simplify the paths in Inkscape to reduce filesize - but this means further combinations will not work as simply.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thoughts on mapsEdit

Hello, Nilfanion. You have new messages at Richardguk's talk page.
Message added 01:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


Answered there. Please notice me when you upload your maps, I need more working examples for the convention page (more strictly based on location maps + B00000 color). Cheer ! Yug (talk) 16:05, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Strip pattern on mapsEdit

Hi Nilfanion, could you advise how you get the pattern for stripes for example in File:Brighton_and_Hove_City_Council_election_2011_map.svg, I tried using the object to pattern in inks-cape but this results in large gaps between the patterns. Kind regards (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

There's a full description of my approach User:Nilfanion/Elections, which should work with your case. If you still have difficulties, it might be easier to upload it anyway - as I'll be able to help correct it then.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Maps of SSSIs in WalesEdit

SSSIs in Anglesey looks good. (Slowly and distracted is the only way I can work). Having tracked down both the CCW search section, and the dbf file, I see what you mean. From the GIS downloads, I couldn't even see Unitary Authorities. Were they in the map data or do you use the position data to select it? Either way, CCW clearly uses unitary Authorities as their only breakdown, and I would guess Wikipedia needs to follow that. There has been a rather rambly discussion at WikiProject_Wales about how to subdivide Welsh lists, but it looks like UAs as the basic division is the thing people can agree on. (Powys UA does also subdivide some of its functions to Shire Committees for its three historic counties - ie they are present day Shires, but not counties.)

In terms of the maps, my own instinct is that a single county/UA map with all the SSSIs (like the Anglesey one), onto which any individual article can put a red dot and label for the one being described, feels like the useful thing. It gives a helpful SSSI context to that site. As we have mentioned before, a second, detailed map, covering the area of the SSSI (and perhaps a buffer area around it), would be great. But I am aware just how many sites there are. Could they be Location_map templates or would that be too time consuming? Thanks. RobinLeicester (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

{{superimpose}} - Brilliant. I am endlessly amazed by how much I know nothing about. And {{superimpose2}} can add labels, car park symbols, whatever, in an editable wiki fashion. I agree that OSGB would be good for these, (and would simplify converting map refs into x and y values). I wonder if the SSSI should be tinted yellow (for example), rather than green, to distinguish it from woodland - ideally in a tone that still lets woodland show through as green!.
Re pushpins etc, I know there has been a lot of discussion and effort with roads etc, but I am unsure how easily linear feature would integrate with a general infobox. There are a lot of coastline SSSIs that have the same issue. RobinLeicester (talk) 23:20, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Creating a new detailed mapEdit

Hi Thanks for your reply and pointing me in the right direction in creating the maps. The problem I have is try to add in the colour, I have looked at and have also uploaded a blank map to derivativeFX link which is suggested.

I have no idea where to add in the following E.G: Of course I need to change to a Scottish council name and Labour.

For example, after the Bristol 2010 election Clifton was solely represented by the Conservatives. The path for this includes: id="Clifton" style="fill:#ffd700;fill-rule:evenodd....

But where does that get added in?

--Crazyseiko (talk) 16:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! I have been able to create the maps, it easy when you know how, cheers! --Crazyseiko (talk) 12:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


Hi. KeithD said you might be able help here. This article has its little internal map very close to the place red dot. I've seen the small insert map moved about to avoid this, but don't know how it's done. Can you add the relevant stuff in the infobox ? I'll learn from how you did it. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 22:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The main map and the inset are in the same image, so their relative positions are fixed. Where have you seen a movable inset? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I can't remember now, it was so many edits ago - but I have seen it I think - if I remember rightly it looked like a piece of info added after a pipe which moved the inset to a different position - from your link it looks like it can't be so - maybe I'm going mad. Acabashi (talk) 10:06, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I've seen some relevant discussion of this eg at Template talk:Location map/Archive 5#Using Template:Location map many for inset images, but I'm not sure of any mainspace usage. I'm sure that Template:Infobox UK place (used in Woolsthorpe-by-Belvoir) is unable to call the templates in such a way.
As Redrose64 says, the inset is hard-coded into the Lincolnshire map. Therefore the inset can't be moved dynamically. There are a few options here I can see:
  1. Shrink the inset. As Lincs is a large county, this might be best option - the red highlight will still be obvious, and a reduced inset will remove the clash. It may be detrimental to the other articles using that image.
  2. Move the inset to a different corner - specifically for Woolsthorpe and similar articles, or generally. IMO the bottom left location is the best for most Lincs locations, so a special map for the few odd cases in that area may be best. Not keen on this.
  3. Create an entirely new map, with the Western boundary adjusted to give more room. This is the hardest for me - but might produce the best end result (as no special case required, good inset size in all images, with the bonus that the map will take slightly less vertical space in articles).
I'll experiment with shrinking the inset slightly, and see if I can get a clear margin for Woolsthorpe without making it too small.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Thinking about this - if you shift the viewport to the right by about 120 or 130px, thus hiding some of Notts/Yorks but revealing more of Norfolk, you might be able to obtain a suitably sized patch of open sea at upper right, just off Spurn Head, into which the inset could be moved. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I'll have a play with this in a couple weeks (wikibreak now). Sorry for delay in getting to this...--Nilfanion (talk) 12:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

split proposal for AqueductEdit

I note your contribution to Talk:Aqueduct and I would like to bring to your attention a proposal that the article Aqueduct be split to Aqueduct (watercourse) and Aqueduct (bridge), with the original article directed to the existing page Aqueduct (disambiguation). Please feel welcome to comment on the proposal at Talk:Aqueduct#Split proposal (2) Please note a similar proposal was made a couple of years ago (see about halfway up the talk page).Nankai (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Nilfanion. You have new messages at Talk:M4 motorway.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

M4 motorway mapEdit

Thanks for doing the map, which I think is excellent. Hopefully other editors will agree! Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :) Do you think it would be worth producing a whole series of similar images?--Nilfanion (talk) 13:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure no-one would object, if you have the time. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
I'll look into that at some point, at least for the long distance routes.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Updates for cyclone tracks mapEdit


I was doing some research about cyclone prone areas and came across your absolutely wonderful map showing the tracks of all cyclones from 1985 to 2005. I wanted to ask if you might be updating it anytime soon with all the new data available now?

Thanks and best regards, Fez. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:16, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Extent of the PenninesEdit

Hello Nilfanion. I wonder would you able to offer any advice about the query I've left at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop#Extent of the Pennines? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

(Seems to now be resolved, but any suggestions you might have on the subject still very welcome, thanks). Martinevans123 (talk) 10:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Left an extensive comment on the article's talk page. That new map works IMO, but I'd prefer more context in the lead map - not just zoomed in on Northern England.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, I did ask, didn't I! An excellent review of image use there, Nilfanion. Thank you very much. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

File:2005AHS test track.png missing description detailsEdit

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Motorway sign panelsEdit

Would you like me to create a set of blue motorway signs without the infamous chopsticks? I can crank them out this weekend. I can set up {{Jct}} to use them as well. –Fredddie 00:53, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah you may as well, the symbol is more to denote a status change, than part of the route identifier. Its location isn't even fixed when it is used.
There are a few other things, these may need adjustments to {{jct}} and certainly need more images on Commons to address. These are (in order of priority)
  1. Providing both primary (yellow/green) and non-primary (black/white) images for relevant A roads, and the ability to switch between them. For example, the M5 has several junctions with the A38, its primary at some (J31) and non-primary at others (J26).
  2. Standardising the sizes of the icons to get rid of the formatting issues.
  3. Providing black/white images for those B roads that need it.
  4. Providing support for E-roads. They aren't signposted but exist in UK and are encyclopedic.
IMO, the primary/non-primary thing is of greater concern than the motorway symbol. The use of that symbol might be incorrect, but its not misleading like showing a primary A38 at J26.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:08, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. It looks like I won't get everything done this weekend like I thought I would, but I will certainly begin and I will update you on my progress as I go. –Fredddie 18:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Thinking about how to split the A roads: One way might be to split the A class in {{jct}} to AP and AS. So {{jct|AP|38}} calls the primary version and {{jct|AS|38}} the secondary. {{jct|A|38}} could fall back to the AP version, and flag any instances into a temp category.
As for the file names, instead of File:UK road A38.svg could be replaced by something like File:UK primary road A38.svg and File:UK secondary road A38.svg.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:19, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

FYI I'm using User:Nilfanion/RJL to set up RJLs for some easier cases. Issues identifed so far are those above.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Also while miles should be shown first (as the commonly understood unit in UK), the source information is in km (as government works in metric). The template can convert the first shown to the second, but not sure if it can do that backwards?--Nilfanion (talk) 20:32, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
That is the limitation with the templates. Typically the sourced length is first and the second column is converted. –Fredddie 20:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
This is a case where UK exceptionalism makes sense. Everywhere else the primary unit the public uses is the working unit of the government. The fact the countdown warnings ahead of roadworks will often be at 2 miles, 1 mile, 800m, 400m, 200m shows how confused situation is in UK.
Its not urgent, as any rounding errors are not significant (no junction is that short). In long term editing the templates to provide for this special case would be useful; but that is something to worry about another time IMO.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:59, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
The metre distances are just metricated versions of the proper distances so that the UK govt can pretend to Europe that we're switching over. The difference between 12 mile (2,640 ft) and 800 metres (2,624.7 ft) is about the same as a car's length - not worth worrying about. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:14, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I asked at WT:MOSICON and got a reply. Your idea is probably fine per MOSICON. –Fredddie 02:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Though I'd wait and not go off just one person's say so, just in case. --Rschen7754 02:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Shires of ScotlandEdit

You have removed the category 'Stirlingshire' from the Balfron entry. I do not understand why the village can no longer be categorised in that way, but notwithstanding, the page still refers to 'Balfron, Stirlingshire' in more than one place, so we need some consistency here. You should consider reverting, or completing the job. An explanation of the talk page would be helpful.Shipsview (talk)

I have just noted that you have made a similar change to Barscobe Castle (since reverted by AN Other). What is going on? Shipsview (talk) 09:04, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

See WT:SCOTLAND, especially the most recent threads. Basically, I'm looking at one user's contribs and will likely miss other instances.
In the case of Balfron, the only other mention of Stirlingshire is in the name field of the infobox. That is inappropriate - its name is just "Balfron".
As for writing about places in the Britain, longstanding convention is to use the current administrative areas (cf Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements). That principle extends to the categorisation too. The best way to write about historical units is as in Christchurch, Dorset: "Christchurch is... in Dorset. Historically part of Hampshire"...--Nilfanion (talk) 09:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
It is mentioning the text of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, which is stronger than the equivalent in England. "On 16th May 1975, all local government areas existing immediately before that date, that is to say, all counties [...] shall cease to exist". Shires of Scotland has been heavily affected by this user, so I would not trust its current content.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikmaps grant request : we need your supportEdit

Hello Nilfanion,
Long time not seen. I just publicly announced a grant request on the Map Workshop talkpage. Please take a look, and support us on meta ! Cheer ! Yug (talk) 12:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

The concept looks good, but I do have two concerns:
  1. Poor data quality. From what I have seen gdam is only really suitable for small scale stuff; I have commented to this effect on the grant's talk. It is not usable for larger scale, and should be avoided when better sources exist. Specifically in UK, lvl 1 (eg England, Wales) are OK, but the gdam boundaries for lvl 2 are not good enough - noticeable generalisation for counties, and awful for the unitary authorities like Southampton. Furthermore even when you do have higher quality data, the relief maps start to get pixellated (the relief data for File:Torfaen UK relief location map.jpg is higher resolution than SRTM).
  2. Duplication of existing material. What will you do about existing maps - skip or do again? May just be a waste of time, but may be an outright regression, if lower quality data is used.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

2011 census - ughEdit

HiI! You seem to be au fait with the 2011 census data, whereas despite wrestling wth the website for about an hour now I can't get what I want out of it. Is there a magic combination of keypresses that will give me a simple table of all Devon's parishes and their 2011 populations? I can get them one at a time, like this for Otterton, but...  —SMALLJIM  15:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The website you want is . Specifically, you want this ; the wizard/advanced query gets you to parish in county download tables.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:07, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I may have walked into a job here. I could spend the next seven years writing a program to update the figures automatically, I suppose (and it would take me about that long).  —SMALLJIM  22:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


Why this edit? In my view it's informative to other editors to leave comments like that in place, per WP:TPO. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Basically, the sockmaster got blocked disruption relating to the article, but the edits to the talk page are themselves becoming disruptive. The edit itself has nothing to do with improving the article, but says checkuser is wrong because his friends did it.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:36, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate that, but striking and then removing their comments seems unnecessary. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:37, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I didn't strike the pre-block comments (which are part of a threaded discussion), and cannot see any value to retaining the comment I reverted.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:43, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

January 2014Edit

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Minnigaff may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • '''Minnigaff''' is a village and civil parish on the A714 in [Dumfries and Galloway]] Administration area, on the east side of the [[River Cree]]. Nearby towns include [[Auchinleck]], [

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:12, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Your work licenceEdit

First of all I whant to thank you for your contribution to Wiki community. I want to use your counties of England map in educational application (helping to lern geography) but it is under CC with share alike (SA) licence. I conclude that my work (application with other maps also) in such case has to have "same or similar licence". So I will have to make other maps (I am not author of them) "open" in order to use your map. But if you could allow me to use it under CC-BY (not SA) licence there will be no such problem and I would be gratefull. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) CC-BY 3.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0 both allow you to make derivative works. The fundamental difference is that under CC-BY-SA (but not under CC-BY), if you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. That is to say, a derivative work made from a CC-BY-SA original must itself be CC-BY-SA, whereas a derivative work made from a CC-BY original may be CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, or another license (subject to certain restrictions). --Redrose64 (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes. To use CC-BY-SA every other part of work has to be able to be published under CC-BY-SA. Otherwise you can't use CC-BY-SA. CC-BY doesn't have such restrictions. (talk) 00:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Generally, my understanding is CC-BY-SA works can be used in conjunction with other works without issue. For instance, if you create a webpage using photos - some which you hold the copyright to, and some under CC-BY-SA - you wouldn't have to license the page itself, or the other photos under a CC-BY-SA compatible license.
Those circumstances may, or may not, apply to your application. If you contact me privately (email my username at gmail) we can discuss your precise needs further. Let me know which exact file(s) you want permission to use, and a bit more about your intended use for them. I doubt there will be any issue preventing your use of my work, that should resolve any difficulties.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:06, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


I see that you've purged this word from the Wikipedia entries of several towns. I think that any town which was in a county for maybe as long as 700 years, should have that fact mentioned; or are you trying to re-write history? (talk) 02:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

This is a general problem with Scottish county names, which through re-writing and changing to modern council area names results in places losing their historical context. For large areas in particular, it also loses geographical context. New Galloway, in Dumfries and Galloway, is not in Dumfriesshire, for example, and so is not helpful in locating the burgh. To describe places in the Highland council area as being 'Highland' is particularly unhelpful. Terms such a 'formerly Kirkcudbrightshire' does not quite cut it for me, as for many Kirkcudbrightshire is still Kirkcudbrightshire. Shipsview (talk) 09:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll refer to Tongland here as a typical example. The edits I made to these articles were not about purging reference to Kirkcudbrightshire, but removing unhelpful info added by an indef-blocked user with an axe to grind. The sentence: "Tongland is a small village about 2 miles north of Kirkcudbright, in Kirkcudbrightshire, within the District Council Region of Dumfries and Galloway, south west Scotland." is not useful on several levels: Dumfries and Galloway is not a District Council Region (an incorrect neologism), Kirkcudbrightshire is not part of Dumfries and Galloway (their interaction is more complex), there's too many locations in the lead sentence (stylistic - a limited number is easier to read), and this brushes over the complexity associated with the counties.
There are two things - the modern council areas and the historic counties. The lead sentence should describe current situation. Longstanding consensus is to not take the POV that the historic counties are extant, and while that consensus may well need review, it is clearly POV to say that Kirkcudbrightshire exists on its present boundaries today. Which contrasts with the unambiguous fact of it being in Dumfries and Galloway, indicating different treatment.
That doesn't mean we should take the POV that Kirkcudbrightshire doesn't exist today either, so I agree "Formerly" doesn't quite work, as that's also a POV assertion. To quote myserlf, 'my preferred formulation - "Historically in <county>, <place> is..." - is reasonably neutral. It neither implies the location currently is in the county nor does it imply its strictly part of the past, and usefully, it doesn't get bogged down.' Alternatives like "located within the historic county boundaries of" also work. Its doable, but needs more careful treatment.
As for broad areas, especially Highland, I agree saying "X is in the Highlands" is not helpful. Saying "X is in Sutherland" may be more precsise but its even less helpful in some ways, as that cannot be found on modern maps and may be totally unfamiliar. The initial sentence could use some other tidbit to localise like "on the Black Isle", "in Glen Garry" or "50 miles NW of Inverness".--Nilfanion (talk) 11:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Fair points.Shipsview (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Essex Map with more detailEdit

Hi Nilfanion. Many thanks for your SVG maps. I wondered if I could get some further detail added to a map of Essex; minor A roads, B roads, woods/forests/parks (e.g. Epping Forest, Danbury woods etc), beaches. I'd add them myself but am not sure how to source the vector info to copy, edit and add. Thanks (PaulMartinIE (talk) 11:12, 18 March 2014 (UTC))

Notification of automated file description generationEdit

Your upload of File:Continuous Track Ivan.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:09, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for commentEdit

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


Hey. I just wanted to say that, in a discussion that I think was overall filled with a lot of silly arguing and unjustified bittnerness, the back and forth we just had at Talk:Worcester was refreshing in its civility and for what I feel was a pretty rational discussion of the points. Thanks for that!--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I know it makes a change with all the nationalistic nonsense around that sort of primary topic discussion! :)
To be honest, I think the whole concept is not worth the sheer amount of time spent on it. Part of that is my suspicion that it only affects a small fraction of readers in any case (its not 60% vs 40% but maybe 6% vs 4%, with the remaining 90% not getting affected whatever we do.
One thing I'd love to see would be Wikimedia search improved to allow regional preferences. After all it can scrape our IP to give relevant Wikimeet notices - why not do something for readers too?--Nilfanion (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Greater London map without insetEdit

Hi Nilfanion. I've been trying to replicate using QGIS and OpenData for my GCSE Geography Coursework. The reason why I'm trying to replicate it is because I can't show an inset. While I'm doing this, by any chance is there a file you have where I can easily remove the inset? This is my first time using QGIS and I've spent an hour trying to work with it (, so I'd appreciate it if you could help out. Thanks!

ThePurpleK (talk) 18:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Its easy enough to remove the inset, if all you need is the map of London without it:
  1. Download the SVG file
  2. Open it in a text editor and delete everything from:


      style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:5" />
  1. That gets rid of the inset.
  2. If you then open the SVG in an image editor such as Inkscape, you should then be able to get an output image. You can also remove the inset by editing the SVG in Inkscape.
I can give you more detailed advice if you want to create something similar yourself using QGIS (copying me exactly will need a lot of unnecessary effort). Let me know if you need any more info.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:09, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

relief map of EnglandEdit

Hello. I am Karen Walker. I request permission to use your relief map of England in a family history book that I wish to publish in print through Amazon CreateSpace. I have used your map twice to illustrate the locations where my ancestors lived. I hope you will allow me to use your map in my book. Thank you. Karen WalkerKarengen (talk) 19:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

relief map of EnglandEdit

Please disregard my request to use you map in my book. Thank you. Karen Walker Karengen (talk) 17:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

DPL botEdit

Not sure what you were doing there, but DPL bot is useful. I can't remember every dab, and it don't jump on you the minute you make a mistake. There's only one bot that is banned from my talk page - Bracketbot. Season's Greetings. Mjroots (talk) 07:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I somehow hit a [rollback] by accident when scrolling through watchlist. I reverted myself when I realised the error. Have a good Christmas.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:06, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Map of Welsh St DonatsEdit

the map outlined for Welsh St Donats is the map of St Donats. The two are frequently interchanged but are distinct parishes. One, St Donats is on the coast while the other, Welsh St Donats is just above Cardiff between Llanblethian and Pendoylan. I've been researching a family from Welsh St Donats and find the situation happens often.

Thank you for the work you do — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

File:BrightonHove OSM1.jpgEdit

Any chance of creating a better map of the Brighton and Hove area and with a Hampshire locator window? User:Hassocks5489 has an extreme number of articles in that area!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:56, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hampshire?? --Redrose64 (talk) 12:16, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
East Sussex, same thing! :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:49, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
There will be an ward map available somewhere in commons:Category:Maps of East Sussex. I won't create anything new until the discussion resolves itself - as I'm hoping to get useful guidance on style.
I know my opinion is against district locators, but I have no issues with city locators. eg IMO Brighton and Hove or a Bath locator is useful, while a Bath and North East Somerset is not.--Nilfanion (talk) 14:13, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Historical mapsEdit

Dear Sir

I am trying to put together a map of Roman Roads and so on - I would like to use your relief maps as a base but need less emphasis on the county / modern administrative boundaries. Is this feasible, convenient or not really what you want to spend time doing.

If - perchance - you were able to create a map showing roman roads, roman villas and the like that would be fantastic.

Once upon a time when the world was young and the Ordnance Survey produced maps for Iron-Age, Roman and Ancient Britain - [even if at different scales] these were helpful but at an gross scale which eliminated worthwhile detail.

What would you be able to extract in terms of hillforts, ancient dykes and the like for a decent scale map with ancient features? yours hopefully JKing — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

When the locations are point locations (eg villas not roads) its trivial to add dots on a background map. For example, see the two maps at Premier League#Clubs. The same can be done as a static map with dots on. Both simply require a list of sites and coordinates. Linear objects are much harder, but I'm sure you know that.
I could easily produce a version of File:England relief location map.jpg (or any of the similar ones) without any of the modern administrative boundaries. That should suffice for your needs?
One caveat to that is that physical geography has changed since the Roman period. For example, the coastlines of the Isle of Wight and Kent are significantly different today.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Park Lane, LondonEdit

Hi, can you make a map or two? We're getting it up to GA. One a central London highlighter highlighting the road location, and perhaps one in which has some annotated buildings on it or a blank one zoomed close up on the street in high resolution so we can add landmarks to them like you see on the football maps?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I can probably do this. First shouldn't be all that difficult - Central London would roughly equate to Zone 1 on the tube?
On the second task, OSM is best source as such a small scale and a simple capture from there would be by far fastest way to get your needs. I figure there's others who are more expert at handling OSM stuff than me.
A question: Park Lane is Hyde Park Corner to Marble Arch - but has it even gone further than that?--Nilfanion (talk) 21:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Northwards - no, that's Edgware Road, which was once part of Watling Street. Southwards - again no, Green Park/Buckingham Palace Gardens are in the way. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Could somebody also crop a good map of the road from OSM? I always have trouble making maps from there nowadays.♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Move: Warleigh, Tamerton FoliotEdit

Your move made on 4 July (Nilfanion moved page Warleigh, Tamerton Foliot to Warleigh House: add house, avoid misleading disambig) appears to have left two almost identical articles: one named Warleigh House and the original named Warleigh, Tamerton Foliot. Did you perform the move correctly using the "move" command or did you cut and paste? Also, the article is not primarily about the house, in its various forms over the centuries, but about the estate, hence my avoidance of using the word "house" in this type of article, which has in the past resulted in architectural purists deleting all text not relating to the architecture of the house. Can you put this right if possible? De we need a WP:MERGE here?(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC))

I correctly performed the move, then stupidly edited the cached version of the original to correct the parish. The history is all on the new location, so easy enough to fix. Sorted this.
I am fine with a location that is correct - I can see the issues with Warleigh House as a location, but both Warleigh, Bickleigh, and Warleigh, Tamerton Foliot, are utterly unsuitable.
However, I find it a bit of stretch to say that is about Warleigh at all - it barely describes the house and has no information on the physical estate. The article is completely dominated by discussion of the owners of the estate. It would make much more sense to have that detailed discussion in a series of articles about the people such as Radcliffes of Warleigh, with these briefly summarised into the article about the property.
See User:Nilfanion/Warleigh for my opinions on the article. IMO vast changes are needed to actually make the content of the article match its title.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting that out. I have read your essay and added my own comments there.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 15:17, 21 August 2015 (UTC)) PS, I'm not happy with the present title "Warleigh House": it does not describe the contents of the article accurately. I would be happy to re-name it Manor of Warleigh, which will fit in with a set of other articles in Category:Former manors in Devon, but I'm not certain that it had its own manorial court, requisite for a true manor to have existed. But I'm happy to be a little inaccurate in this regard if you would be happier with that title?(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 15:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC))
I agree that the current title is not right - the title is more suitable for that of the building alone. It should not be placed at Manor of if it was not a manor, Warleigh Estate is possible.
Warleigh, the estate, is not solely something on a map. Its not solely a succession of people either. I'm concerned trying to write exclusively about one aspect and ignoring the other is inappropriate for Wikipedia (WP is not VCH). Focusing solely on the descent is not providing a full picture of the estate. Your suggestion that the physical estate belongs in a separate article - as that's unnecessary fork of the content. Both should be able to sit happily together in a well-written article. You are not obliged to write about those other aspects, but without them the article cannot be presented as complete.
IMO an article like Holnicote Estate suggests the right way forward, as it addresses all aspects of that estate. If Holnicote House (the actual building) survived, it would be more developed as a sub-topic and might be suitable for a standalone article.
With that in mind, could you point me to another article on Wikipedia - that is that is not primarily written by yourself, and is solely descent-based?--Nilfanion (talk) 21:29, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


Can you create a map of Soho like File:Soho_-_map_1.png with a Greater London highlighter window of the area in the corner?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Colchester ward mapEdit

Hi. I saw you had created the old Colchester Borough Council ward map. The boundaries have been redrawn for next years election, so I was hoping you could let me know how you made the previous graphic so I can remake it with the new boundaries.

Anything you can do to help would be very much appreciated.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I will probably update the boundary map myself at some point when OS releases the 2016 boundary sets. Please see this reply I gave to a similar query. That should give you a good starting point.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:24, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I've just read up on your tips for creating such maps, Nilfanion. I downloaded what I believe to be the most recent boundaries from OS open data and had a stab at it on QGIS. It seems like something I can help out with too when the time comes. Do you think OS would publish boundary changes before the next election in May? Hopefully if so, someone will post it on WPUKGEO. Sadly, all I have to work on for Exeter's changes is a PDF map from the Boundary Commission. Thanks for the tips. Jolly Ω Janner 01:28, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!Edit

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 19, 2016Edit

Hi, I'll start work on this one today. You nominated the article at WP:FAC. This was promoted back in 2006; please check to see if the article needs updating. - Dank (push to talk) 01:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)



Thank you for quality articles in over 10 years, such as 2003 Pacific hurricane season, for generously supplying maps, templates, project work and admin services, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1387 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Three years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Image:AmenhotepIII North Colossus.jpg and Image:Closeup_South_Colossus.jpgEdit

These were BOTH images I took myself. How do I undelete them?

Image copyright problem with Image:AmenhotepIII North Colossus.jpg

Image copyright problem with Image:Closeup_South_Colossus.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Than217 (talkcontribs) 20:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Bus PicsEdit

Hi.. So what's the situation/progress regarding the removal? :) In the time being, if you could alter the name to "Lawrence Abel" as oppose to my whole name (Olon...) as that is my middle name, and all work etc is logged under as "Lawrence Abel"

Cheers - LawrenceAbel (talk) 16:44, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Objection to your NI map styleEdit

Hi, just wanted to notify you that I objected to your new NI map style at Template_talk:Infobox_UK_place#Northern_Ireland_maps. Mabuska (talk) 13:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Noted - to be honest, I'm grateful to actually get a comment on this. :)--Nilfanion (talk) 16:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Referendum mapEdit

Just a note to say - you've got Carmarthenshire, in South Wales, the wrong colour - it should be Leave, not Remain, by the BBC. Dionysodorus (talk) 09:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Fixed (not surprised there is an error..)--Nilfanion (talk) 09:09, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

The West Country ChallengeEdit

Hi. I was wondering if you'd be interested in participating in Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge in August. A chance to win £250 as well! If contests aren't your thing we welcome independent contributors too. If interested sign up at participants. Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protectionEdit

 Hello, Nilfanion. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for adminsEdit


Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page PatrollersEdit

Hi Nilfanion.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Nilfanion. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox tropical cyclone smallEdit

Nomination for deletion of Template:US InflationEdit

 Template:US Inflation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Samsara (talk) 06:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Cyprus Location MapEdit

Hello. I haven't understand how to do it. [1] How can I found the coordinates of the cropped map? Xaris333 (talk) 17:00, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Replied there.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

  Administrator changes

  BriangottsJeremyABU Rob13

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.



  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

New Scottish council mapsEdit


Hey I was wondering if you are.planning on making update to date Scottish council maps following the recent boundary Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 19:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC) @Barryob: do you mean changes to the electoral wards for the councils, or something else? If so I will check for and upload any maps required well before the elections in May.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes the electoral wards have been redrawn, many thanks Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 13:27, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@Barryob: I've got first one uploaded now - see to right. I'll get working on the change in rest of Scotland (plus England and Wales) over the next couple of weeks.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:21, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Plymouth RMEdit

Hi Nilfanion. Thanks for raising that RM for Plymouth, which managed to temporarily rouse me from my wiki-torpor! Unfortunately it didn't draw any response from the other editors who were once interested in Devon topics, reinforcing my opinion that the Devon WikiProject is now dormant.

Regarding your last response in that RM, I still believe that your calculation of search mis-hits (2.5%) rests on an unstable foundation. I showed that the Plymouth (car) hits hardly changed at all when you changed the hatnote link to that redirect: I'd be most surprised if they drop down to zero after its removal. The evidence indicates that 2.5% is an overestimate and it also shows that assuming that different articles contribute equal proportions to mis-hits is false - the hits on Plymouth (Massachusetts) increased far more than those on Plymouth (car). The problem is that trying to extrapolate from such tiny samples means that any conclusions are almost bound to be way off.

More generally, someone ought to push for a rewrite of WP:PTOPIC to take account of the changes brought about by the search drop-down list - which should have drastically reduced the number of people landing on the wrong page - and to more accurately reflect the criteria that underly how move decisions are really being made these days. In a far better way than B2C's recent DoA proposal.

See you around,  —SMALLJIM  09:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Yep, I agree with you on a lot of this, it does look like Devon is virtually moribund. I don't think the UK wikiproject is particularly active anymore either. I'm finding it harder to get input on UK-wide issues (like my maps).
I agree that the basis for 2.% is weak, and the biggest problem is the small amount of hits such things get. That is why I didn't include such analysis in the initial nomination. I believe a broader experiment could be done on that, with a wide variety of other articles. I note the trap link from Lincoln for the US president gets 50% of the dab's hits, but barely 0.7% of Abe's traffic. IMO the 0.7% is lower than the 2.5% for the Plymouth terms, as many people looking for him will start with his full name. Part of me wanted the move to happen, simply so we could get solid evidence that it was wrong in fact - as a link trap from Plymouth to Plymouth, Devon, might well show that.
I totally agree with you that primary topic guidance is dated, but I stand by the nomination (in the sense that IMO it was right per current primary topic guidance). If anything I think B2C's DOA proposal was back-to-front, and the reverse proposal would be a better starting point - as that acknowledges the key point that pageviews aren't everything.
I believe we should be a lot more move-averse than we are, even if that leads to inconsistent results. That's because there's a number of routes to a WP article and I think title stability should be a more important consideration than helping the limited traffic that uses internal search naively, compared to the vast majority of readers who use other routes. If the 2.5% is accurate, we may be degrading the experience for the vast majority by working to their needs.
I'd appreciate it if you could pop over to Commons, where Plymouth has an open CFD. IMO supporting readers from external websites is important there (as its primary goal is a support website), while naive searching is non-existent (its useless over there). Those two facts emphasise stability. One additional issue over there is HotCat users, who can behave similarly to naive-searchers - making editor errors like this much more likely.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
I looked at the CFD on Commons and let it hang around in my head for a few days. But no useful comments have come to the fore – I'm not very au fait with Commons at all. Sorry.  —SMALLJIM  21:05, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough, to be honest from WP's perspective all that's really wanted from Commons is stability. :)--Nilfanion (talk) 21:31, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Nilfanion. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Bradshaw, CalderdaleEdit

Why did you revert most of my changes here? As I explained there was no source for the population, it is not part of Halifax and the coordinates were outside West Yorkshire. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

uhh.. that was a mistake on my part, I thought I was editing most recent version?--Nilfanion (talk) 17:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, now fixed (along with other minor changes). Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:44, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


If your reply was that Tamerton Foliot‎ isn't separate in this post, wouldn't you consider it reasonable to say Topsham is. Also Topsham doesn't appear to still be a town. Topsham is also separated from Exeter by the M5 so I don't think people would normally think of it as being part anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll answer the simpler bit first. Topsham isn't a town? Says who?--Nilfanion (talk) 17:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Your usual misinterpretation of my comments I see: My comment was Tamerton Foliot is part of Plymouth. AND that it would be part of Plymouth even if a small strip of countryside separated it from the main built-up area (making it a distinct built-up area per ONS definition).
At the time of my comment, there was tiny link between main-Plymouth and Tamerton Foliot. A new housing estate has fully linked the two areas now.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
OK, it appears it is a town, its just that the part "until the Exeter urban district was formed" implies that it stopped and it was categorized under former towns.
In that case how would you define something to be separate then? Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia is built on consensus, which is based upon reliable sourceS. Not looking at a single source and slavishly following it. We don't follow the dictionary. We don't follow OS. We don't follow ONS. We use OS, we use ONS, we use council websites, we use the Daily Mail, we use pronouncements by Donald Trump. We assess how reliable they are, we then use that information.
In this case, we follow the consensus that was developed for WP:UKDISTRICTS: Specifically "in around 45 cases the district is considered to occupy the same area as a settlement". If you are talking about one of those 45 settlements, which include both Exeter and Plymouth, then the district is the settlement. If you want to change that, go to WP:UKGEO and start a broader discussion.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes but generally we need to work out what something is, not what something is according to particular sources. I can't find many sources that refer to it as being part of the settlement of Exeter. Devon guide (which I don't think is a RS) uses the words "technically part of Exeter" which probably refers to the district, not settlement boundaries.
UKDISTRICTS is based on if there should be separate articles, not on what is described as being part of, in this case people haven't split probably because they don't think that there is enough of a difference, in part also due to when the boundaries were formed (I expect that one day we will have separate articles, either due to size of article, per BOLD split or because Topsham becomes a CP). If this was the case we would have to say that Bere Alston is the same as Bere Ferrers which would contradict this discussion. In this case Topsham is similar to Bere Alston. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
The category on Commons for the civil parish of Bere Ferrers is an entirely different situation to this. Bere Ferrers and Bere Alston quite rightly have separate articles.
More importantly, if you want to actually discuss this further please engage with the community-at-large - instead of trying to trip me up with my past statements. My opinion is clear - follow UKDISTRICTS. I have pointed you to an appropriate venue if you aren't happy with that guidance. Please go there to see if the community agrees with you.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
The point is that Bere Alston isn't described as being in Bere Ferrers its self.
My points are still about how they are described, not if Exeter is split. Take a look at Castle Hill, Suffolk, it describes it as being a suburb and being in the Ipswich district. You might also want to join the discussion at Commons:User talk:Skinsmoke#Wirral Urban District Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
If you want to talk about changing the guidance of UKDISTRICTS, go elsewhere.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)


Now that the AFD for Castle Hill has been closed, I would suggest that the information here needs to at least partly be removed. It is not really relevant to Whitton and is a bit WP:OFFTOPIC, maybe a small amount can remain as the areas to overlap as the ward and settlement are not the same. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

The text in Whitton needs revision and appropriate linking to the Castle Hill article. However, it is in not off topic at all. The area that is now Castle Hill was within Whitton (and arguably is still part of Whitton). Historical information, like the existence of Roman villa or the construction of the housing estates, should be included in BOTH articles. Information solely about modern Castle Hill, like if a high-profile crime happened there, would only belong in the Castle Hill article.
Some of the text is mere fluff, is not encyclopedic and shouldn't be included in either article. Its encyclopedic that Time Team did an episode there. Its not encyclopedic that they dug up some land near Tranmere Grove.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
I removed a bit about the housing scheme. The names of the streets that are now there is surely at least a bit encyclopedic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Not really, a residential street has no importance whatsoever. All that matters is Time Team visited the area. The only people who care which exact streets the show was on are those individuals who had them in their gardens. Its just trivia.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

List of ecclesiastical parishes in the Diocese of Bath and WellsEdit

I have taken the liberty of putting List of ecclesiastical parishes in the Diocese of Bath and Wells up at FLC (nomination & discussion page). One of the (few so far) suggestions is to make the reference to bold into a note rather than have it written out in the lead. As this relates to your original purpose for the list I wanted to get your take on it before making changes.— Rod talk 07:36, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Have you had any thought on the bold? See the latest comment from User:The Rambling Man which says "I think I'm all good but for the use of bold alone which is in contravention of MOS:ACCESS, like WP:NOSTRIKE, i.e. By default, most screen readers do not indicate presentational text attributes (bold, italic, underline)...."— Rod talk 14:20, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Per latest comments on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of ecclesiastical parishes in the Diocese of Bath and Wells/archive1 do you have a list of parishes in the Diocese with "alternative oversight" - I'm having trouble finding this. Also there is a comment about including grid refs?— Rod talk 19:20, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Do you have the source of 477 parishes as I believe this came from your original data grab? Now being asked about on FLC page.— Rod talk 09:25, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

New articlesEdit

I have created User:Crouch, Swale/South Huish and User:Crouch, Swale/Brington and Molesworth as suggested. One being settlement and civil parish, one being only the name of a CP. 2 things, should I use the 2016 estimates or the 2011 census and is the KEPN OK? it could be vague, since they are often guesses. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:30, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Please create a substantial article on both, not a stub with an infobox. Ideally you should be aiming for a much higher standard, and if you can demonstrate you can write an article to B-Class standard I would support you creating articles. There are plenty of decent examples around you could emulate, High Littleton is an example. If your only intention is to write an article with under 5 sentences of text, I will continue to oppose you doing so.
What I'm looking for is to see a lot of content - "not South Huish is a village with 700 inhabitants". When was it founded? Is the CP ancient or modern? Has it seen any boundary changes? Was anyone notable born there? Is there a school? Is it on a major road/railway? Who is its MP? Are there any historic buildings? Those are some of the various questions a decent article should answer. The higher quality standards are about formatting, copyediting and presentation - less important than actually having the info.--Nilfanion (talk) 15:29, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
There is no need to have B-Class, a stub is enough. We have hundreds of missing CPs, trying to write a B-Class for all of them would be widely impractical. The relevant point is that they should contain useful content rather than just "South Huish is a village and civil parish in South Hams, Devon, England" which would probably be left as a redlink, see WP:1S, which is why I nominated theses redirects for deletion because a redlink is better than a redirect.
No relevant info there, unlike here.
What do you think should be done with Doddinghurst (parish) and North Weald Bassett, they both have a BUASD different to the parish but Doddinghurst also just has the parish population, do you think we should just have 1 article for both village and parish, even when the BUASD is different? Do you agree with merging Wistow and Newton Harcourt? Do you also agree grouped civil parishes aren't usually notable and most of these should be merged? Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
This is not about the subjects. This is about you.
If you want my support for you being allowed to create articles you need to demonstrate that the ability to create a high-quality article. By doing so you clearly demonstrate that you are able to find sources, assess their reliability, are able to understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and therefore are likely to make ongoing substantial contributions to this project. If you fail to do that, the risks I see in your behaviour make me believe removing the ban is a bad idea.
The grouped parishes are the latest example of a warning sign, as you are seeking a quick rule "grouped CPs = non-notable" instead of engaging in a discussion to reach a consensus-based outcome, and then that to work out way forward. Grouped CPs may or may not be notable. I don't know, as WP hasn't actually had that discussion. In the absense of that a consensus-based discusson WP:GNG applies.
I urge you to try to engage with me on this. If you show any interest in doing so, I will explain my logic more fully to you and give you a lot of support. Throwing more examples at me makes me LESS inclined to support you, or indeed interact with you. Your choice.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
I have added more content to Theydon Mount
I you have been so negative about me creating lots of short article and splitting things to small articles, surely you should feel the reverse about my comments about grouped parishes. Either you want non notable topics or you don't. Most grouped parishes don't have any third party sources and can easily be added to a "governance" section. Like the situations where we had extra CP articles, I could just tag them for merging and proforma if there are no objections. If I am intending on following the notability guidelines then surely that should present a strong case. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:10, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
I have tried to engage with you on this.
The concern that grouped parishes highlights is you seeking a simple black/white line for a class of subjects, and making up your own rule to follow rigidly. Things are not that simple with low-notability subjects, and precedent (at AFD) is probably the best guide.
My biggest concern is after the CP articles have been created. I don't have a clue what subject area you'd move on to, and you don't either. However, I fully expect that to be a class of low-notability places. I also if you create lots of stubby articles quickly on barely-notable subjects, those articles are unlikely to survive AFD and you are generating the same problems as before. If you create more substantial articles on the exact same subjects, there is much less risk of disruption. That's because 1) Your creation rate will be a lot lower and (2) more importantly, by giving that extra info, they are much less likely to go to AFD in the first place.
That is why I want to see you write a substantial article, on a subject like a CP - which is something you are interested in and clearly will have a ton of information out there. It gives you the chance to demonstrate that you have the ability to create articles in a way that will not cause future disruption. Just saying "stubs are enough" indicates you are likely to revert back to the past behaviour.
The edits to Theydon Mount are exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see far more of - may comment further on article's talk--Nilfanion (talk) 11:25, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Notability is often a minimum threshold. For example we know that every CP should have a standalone article (with the exception of cases where it is an alternative name of a settlement, Shiptonthorpe/Shipton Thorpe or maybe where it was renamed to the name of a settlement Stoak/Stoke, Cheshire West and Chester) while places that aren't named on maps will need to have GNG demonstrated. With cases like Catterall it might be up to editor consensus on a case by case basis to determine if village and parish should have a separate article (as only some of the village is in the parish). Settlements that don't have population data appear to be more controversial.
BUASD and Domesday places I might do a some point, though I will discuss that beforehand. I'm not going to bother with wards as they appear to change area and name too quickly and per your concerns, even though Castle Hill was kept. My other thought is also to use a bot to create lists of listed buildings in X parish/unparished area like List of listed buildings in Erskine, Renfrewshire. Obviously I would need to discuss that and have that set up (as I wouldn't know how to do that).
Certainly Theydon Bios, Garnon and Mount have a lot of sources even though they are very small. With those like Brington and Molesworth which only exist as a CP, administration and boundary changes are probably the most relevant info. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:02, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Your problem is, and always has been, working at the very lowest margin of importance - where notability is in question. BUASDs and things mentioned in Domesday are both questionable notability, not a guarantee. I have no objection to GOOD articles on those low-importance subjects, as those articles will clearly demonstrate notability. Stubby articles do not do that, and will inevitably result in a disruptive mess.
All parishes have economic and demographic statistics. They also all have physical geography, and a history and historic buildings. Therefore it is easy to write at least 3 paragraphs.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes until recently I usually tried to have as many separate articles as possible, I can now see that that's not necessarily effective. I'd not that we do have a long article on Ram Hill. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Now started at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:07, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Plymouth linksEdit

The links in templates generally should not use Plymouth, Devon in templates per WP:BRINT. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:22, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm aware of the error here. Note that it is not helpful to just say something is "wrong per WP:3LA". Instead say why it is wrong: Paraphrase the guidance, don't give its title, and definitely not an obscure wiki acronym. It is much clearer and makes communication much easier.
That's particularly true when it comes to more important discussions. "X is the WP:PTOPIC" is an assertion without evidence. "X is the primary topic, because of Y" is much more helpful.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Are you saying that you knew your edits were wrong when you made them? DuncanHill (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
I thought that you might have been doing an experiment of something similar. I didn't think it was necessary to explain, you are an experienced editor and the guideline explains it, but what I was meaning is that when you are on Plymouth it shows up in bold rather than a link. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
No I didn't realise the problem at the time, I thought it would be completely invisible to readers (which is not true due to bolding).--Nilfanion (talk) 13:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

West Midlands (region) map for rugby union clubsEdit

Nilfanion - hi, hope you are well. I have been updating the rugby union pages for the English leagues and am getting to the stage where leagues are more and more regionalised. I believe that you created an excellent map for me a while back for the south west rugby sides which was tremendously useful. I was wondering if you would be able to help me create a regional map for the West Midlands region (not the county) - an example of the teams that need to be covered are below (left) (Midlands 1 West)? Most of these teams fall into the West Midlands region but occasional teams from surrounding regions might be included (see Lutterworth) so the map needs to be slightly larger than just the West Midlands. I am finding that the Midlands map alone is getting somewhat cramped. Thanks for your time. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 19:54, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jgjsmith006: To clarify, you'd need all the counties in the West Midlands region, plus all adjacent counties? Could you clarify the situation for the other leagues too?--Nilfanion (talk) 07:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Nilfanion - I need the West Midlands region to be shown in a similar fashion to the map for the East Midlands (shown below). This means that teams on the border regions can still be displayed. I need all the counties in West Midlands (Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, Birmingham and the West Midlands, Worcestershire) but occasionally border teams from Cheshire, Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Oxfordshire have taken part (but this is rarer) - in Midlands 1 West Lutterworth are from Leicestershire but usually they would play in Midlands 1 East. I am still working my way through the other divisions but I do not think there are any other issues (at least off the top of my head). Thanks. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 09:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 :: I have also noticed Southern Counties North map is very cramped - see below far right. Perhaps some kind of map is also needed for teams from Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire. Appreciate all your work Nilfanion. Cheers. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 13:50, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Photo of Greyfriars TowerEdit

I would like to use your photo of Greyfriars Tower in a family genealogy book I am self-publishing. I want to make sure that I can use it without violating a copyright. I see you have given permission for it to be used but you have not specified how you want it to be attributed. Would you clarify that for me please? Many Thanks P.WhitakerPPWhitaker (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Windermere, Cumbria listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Windermere, Cumbria. Since you had some involvement with the Windermere, Cumbria redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:03, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


I have added more to User:Crouch, Swale/South Huish and also created User:Crouch, Swale/Risga, I will see if I can add more in the next few months. I have User:Crouch, Swale/To do which you might want to discuss but as noted some might not be notable/viable. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:16, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I have now started another appeal at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:49, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Nilfanion. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Crouch, Swale restrictions appealEdit

Resolved by motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment:

The restriction on new article creations imposed on Crouch, Swale (talk · contribs) as part of their unban conditions in January 2018 is modified as follows:
  • Crouch, Swale is permitted to create new articles only by creating them in his userspace or in the draft namespace and then submitting them to the Articles for Creation process for review. He is permitted to submit no more than one article every seven days. This restriction includes the creation of new content at a title that is a redirect or disambiguation page.
  • The one-account restriction and prohibition on moving or renaming pages outside of userspace remain in force.

For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 18:24, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Amendment request: Crouch, Swale restrictions appeal (January 2019)

Map of SussexEdit

Hi there. I've been searching for a combined map of East and West Sussex and with no joy, I was wondering if you're able to produce one?

I've currently editing Southern Combination Football League and associated pages and would like to put in a clearer map of the two counties combined to show where each football team is located. Currently there is a South East England map but looks unclear where the teams play.

I will be very grateful if you could do this. Thanks EddersGTI (talk) 21:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Рик! 2019-й год === решающее ВСЁ Время. Каждый выбирает , но помнит как и всегда- выбирай как для СЕБЯ САМОГО) У тебя есть СВЕТ? Ты можешь говорить со мной? Я Айя.....

Рик! 2019-й год === решающее ВСЁ Время. Каждый выбирает , но помнит как и всегда- выбирай как для СЕБЯ САМОГО) У тебя есть СВЕТ? Ты можешь говорить со мной? Я Айя.....

Dear Nilfanion,

I would like to reproduce one of the maps (Eartham Pit, Boxgrove is located in West Sussex) in an exhibition booklet and would like to ask if you have a high res. image (JPG or TIFF suitable for printing with the credit line.

I would be grateful if you could let me know and by email I can let you know the publication details.

Thank you, Justyna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infi2222 (talkcontribs) 10:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circularEdit

Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)Edit

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

38th edition of The Hurricane HeraldEdit

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 38 - I'm only sending this to you because you got a mention in the history of the tropical cyclone Wikiproject ;) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Nilfanion".