Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:15, 16 May 2012

Redrose64 is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Hello, Redrose64! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Misplaced Pages. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Misplaced Pages you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! --Jza84 |  Talk  13:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC) Getting Started Misplaced Pages Tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

My Talk Archives

Hints: 13 July 2009- Suggestions: 13 July 2009- Responses: 20 July 2009- Thanks: 17 August 2009- Complaints: 26 August 2009- Requests: 18 October 2009- Queries: 6 November 2009- Miscellaneous: 26 March 2010- Admin: 24 August 2010-

GWR 378 Class

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of GWR 378 Class, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.reachinformation.com/define/GWR_378_Class.aspx.

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

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Gotta love that bot sometimes... – iridescent 13:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes. It's utter b*ll*cks that I'd rip off another website. It's them ripping us off, and not giving due credit to WikiMedia Foundation, Misplaced Pages or even me. Somebody's removed the {{csb-pageincludes}} though; if it hadn't gone by 21:05 (UST) tonight I'd have removed it myself and to heck with the quincequonces. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Phew!

Right now, I never want to hear the words "Duke of Buckingham" again. Hopefully, that's the set complete. To think, this originally only started as a side-track from St. Mary's Church, Chesham… – iridescent 19:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

How about "and Chandos"? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I could do without "also known as Earl Temple of Stowe", too. – iridescent 20:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Class 33

There were also links coming from KA and KB ? Maybe you have the answer to this mystery for me also?

Also could you put some explanation somewhere about the D15 thing (on the main page, or maybe British Rail locomotive and multiple unit numbering and classification) - I didn't find anything there? (ok a very small mention well hidden).

Maybe dates for the years the locos carried the numbers could be added?

As for Class 34, my opinion is that if reliably referencable then it's valid to mention it, but if no locomotive ever carried the number then it doesn't really fit in the template.. An extension to List of British Rail unbuilt locomotive classes or similar would seem to be the place to mention it ("List of BR unused TOPS numbers" as a title?) . Up to you.Sf5xeplus (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

KA & KB are Southern Region pre-TOPS classifications for what latterly became Classes 33/0 and 33/1, just as HA, JA & JB were the SR classifications for what latterly became Classes 71, 73/0 and 73/1 - see Southern Electric Group - SR/BR(S) & TOPS Classes Conversion Tables. Like the E&NER codes, they were never borne by the actual locomotives, but were used on internal documentation; and also like the E&NER codes they crept into common usage because it was easier to say "We need a KB" than to say "We need a Birmingham RCW Type 3 with narrow body". Many SR people still use these codes in preference to TOPS.

Again, don't confuse TOPS classification with TOPS numbering. TOPS classifications (such as 33 and 34) were first drafted in 1967, and formally introduced round about the end of steam (circa August 1968), and, as with the existing regional systems, were mainly used on documents. TOPS numbers (such as 33 001 etc.) were allocated in late 1972 and began to be applied to the actual locos from early 1973. Since by August 1969, the erstwhile Class 34 had become Class 33/2, and the numbers allotted in late 1972 were linked to the classification by the first two digits, no locomotive would ever have been numbered 34 001 or similar. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Spot the Hush Hush

That's excellent to know, but how can we tell?

The source (gradually onto Commons) is a book of broad social history - about 300 pages (unnumbered, which is annoying) and 1000 photos from 1914-1938. There's some really obscure and useful stuff in here, even though the quality isn't great. I'm still searching for representative pictures of 10,000 that are copyright acceptable though. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Deduction. The right hand loco clearly has no nameplate, and no. 10000 was never named. Even after enlarging the photo, it's difficult to tell whether the left-hand loco has a nameplate or not, but enlargement shows that the middle three have partial names GOLDEN SHU, EMPIRE O and DEN EAG in that order. The description on the Commons page says "Dominion of New Zealand, Golden Shuttle, Empire of India, Golden Eagle and Nº 10,000" - the second to fourth names clearly correspond to the visible lettering on the middle three locos. Since these are in the same order, it's reasonable to assume that the left-hand loco is the first one listed, Dominion of New Zealand, so by elimination, the right-hand one must be 10000. Coming back to the r/h loco having no nameplate: only four A4s ran without nameplates - these were nos. 2509-12 from new (1935) until repainted in blue livery (Nov 1937-Aug 1938), but none of these were Dominion of New Zealand - they all had "Silver" in their names. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I'd rather suspected the caption might simply be in their order, but I was wondering if you knew something subtle about the shape of 10,000's chimney or somesuch. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

There are subtle differences, but are difficult to spot without actually standing alongside with a measuring tape. The bogie wheelbase of the W1 (6'6") is 3 inches longer than the A4 bogie (6'3"). Like the A4, the cylinders are not central between the bogie wheels, but slightly to the rear; it seems that the distance from cylinder to rear bogie wheel is the same in both classes, so on the W1 the front bogie wheel is 3" further forward relative to the cyls, with the combined result that: the buffers are correspondingly further from the cylinders; the access panel forward of the cyls is similarly 3" longer; and the hole in that panel in which to put the crank for opening the smokebox door cover is also 3" further from the cyls.

Also, see

• Boddy, M.G.; Brown, W.A.; Hennigan, W.; Hoole, Ken; Neve, E.; Yeadon, W.B.; Fry, E.V.; Jackson, D.; Manners, F. (1984). Fry, E.V. (ed.). Locomotives of the L.N.E.R., part 6C: Tender Engines - Classes Q1 to Y10. Kenilworth: RCTS. p.155 & fig. 132. ISBN 0 901115 55 X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

where we find that there is a subtle bulge on the side of the cylinders (no more than +21⁄32 of an inch), which is not found with the A4. However, if you know exactly what to look for, it does reflect light slightly differently, provided that the angle of incident light is right, which in this case it fortunately is. On the right-hand loco on the photo, locate the cylinder side panelling. At front and rear edges of this there is a vertical double row of rivet heads; look at the one at the rear of the cylinders. Counting the ones which form part of the top edge of the valance as the first pair, then between the seventh and eighth pairs down the cylinder side is lighter in colour. This is the upper surface of the bulge concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but are you sure? 8-) Andy Dingley (talk) 13:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Sue Perkins link

Hi. The original link (http://www.lgso.org.uk/index.htm) gives a 404 error, but the amended URL (http://www.lgso.org.uk/) works for me, so why do you say it's still dead? Charivari (talk) 22:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Because when I tried it, it threw an error (but not a 404). However, I see that it now goes through, so I now observe a different problem: it does not back up any part of the statement "Perkins guest-conducted the London Symphony Orchestra on 11 October 2009, at St Anne's Church Garden in Soho, London, UK. She conducted two pieces, the Simpsons Theme by Danny Elfman, and the William Tell Overture by Rossini, the latter for the first time." Accordingly, I've changed the tag to a {{Failed verification|date=September 2010}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:16, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ian Jack

Ian Jack is a short stub of an article which has 5 cites from reliable third party sources. Is this not enough? best Mick gold (talk) 12:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a biography of a living person. It therefore needs to be 100% referenced, to reliable third-party sources. At the time that I placed the {{BLP sources}} notice, it wasn't. Since then, two refs have been added: one of which (the Granta one) may fall within the area of self-published sources; but although the Observer one is fine as a reference source, it still doesn't back up everything that it's been placed against: it says nothing about him living in London with his wife and two children.

Several statements remain unrefd; of these, the ones which have the strongest need for a ref are those concerning his date and place of birth, wife and children. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Ian Jack is listed in Who's Who 2010, A&C Black, which I believe would be considered WP:RS. His entry reads:

‘JACK, Ian Grant’, Who's Who 2010, A & C Black, 2010; online edn, Oxford University Press, Dec 2009 ; online edn, Nov 2009 :::accessed 2 Nov 2010

JACK, Ian Grant

Born 7 Feb. 1945; s of Henry Jack and Isabella Jack (née Gillespie); m 1st, 1979, Aparna Bagchi (marr. diss. 1992); 2nd, 1998, Rosalind Sharpe; one s one d

writer and editor; Editor, Granta, 1995–2007

EDUCATION

Dunfermline High School, Fife

CAREER

Trainee journalist, Glasgow Herald, 1965; reporter, Cambuslang Advertiser and East Kilbride News, 1966; journalist, Scottish Daily Express, 1966–70; Sunday Times, 1970–86; Observer and Vanity Fair (NY), 1986–88; Dep. Editor, 1989–91, Exec. Editor, 1991–92, Editor, 1992–95, Independent on Sunday. Journalist of the Year, Granada TV What The Papers Say award, 1985; Colour Magazine Writer of the Year, 1985, Reporter of the Year, 1988, British Press Awards; Nat. Newspaper Editor of the Year, Newspaper Focus Awards, 1992.

So I have added some details to the WP article. best wishes Mick gold (talk) 13:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The Twin Dilemma

Sorry, I wasn't aware that the DW fans had limited cast notes to appearances in the series. However, the information is correct.--♦IanMacM♦ 20:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It needs to be relevant to the article, and must also be sourced - there is too much unsourced trivia in Misplaced Pages as it is, but the DW pages are a real magnet for it. Look at The Twin Dilemma#Cast notes: there are presently four entries there - all of them are unsourced, admittedly, but three have direct DW relevance - they are previous and/or future appearances in other DW serials. If we did put such "also appeared in" stuff into the DW serial articles, we could get something like "... appeared as Joshamee Gibbs in the Pirates of the Caribbean films; he also appeared in Not Quite Paradise, The Berlin Affair, Cry Freedom, Spice World, Sliding Doors ..." - it would just get silly. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair up to a point, but Joshamee Gibbs in the Pirates of the Caribbean films is by far the role for which Kevin McNally is best known. I do try not to add unsourced trivia to articles, but thought that this was worth mentioning. Anyway, not worth an edit war over this minor issue.--♦IanMacM♦ 20:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

KT5720 sub categories.

Hi there, thanks for you message. I wasn't aware at all. So for this article KT5720, your saying not to add Category:Biochemistry stubs but to add {{Biochem-stub}}? Does this apply to most articles or what is already listed in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Stub_types. --Visik (talk) 02:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Generally, any category ending in " stubs" should have at least one member which is a template ending in "-stub"; such templates should be listed at the top of the category (but after any subcategories). These stub templates should also be listed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types, and if not listed, it's not been formally approved by WP:WPSS.

So, at Category:Biochemistry stubs, under 'Pages in category "Biochemistry stubs"', we find:

The following 196 pages are in this category, out of 1,365 total. This list may not reflect recent changes (learn more).

• Template:Biochem-stub
• Template:Metabolism-stub

If you click on one of these you'll get the stub template page and its documentation, which includes something like {{Biochem-stub}} so that you can copy&paste it. An examination of the text of the stub template should show its relevance; where more than one stub template is listed, try each one. In some cases (as here) there are subcategory pages, where you might find a stub template which is even more relevant. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Station Links

Hm, does this make you more of an 'anorak' than moi ? ! Anoraker (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a convention that is written down somewhere, but I just can't find anymore...

Basically, in articles primarily dealing with railway topics, we link to either the station or to the place, depending on context. We would link to the station articles in such circumstances as:

• the railway line was opened from x to y
• the town of X is served by two railway stations, y and z.
• the service runs between x and y

However we do link to the town/city/etc. articles in circumstances like these:

• A railway line between x and y was proposed but not built
• X railway station is situated in x, although it primarily serves the neighbouring town of y

--Redrose64 (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Puzzled

at someone from Lancashire not knowing the Wirral - even though it was in Cheshire. The book is still there (in the Class 40 article at least) in Further Reading. Looks like a useful book, even though self-published. (Many specialised books are - a classic on Jowett Cars advertising was self-published by a friend of mine.) Peridon (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

No, what I mean is, there is no such town as Wirral - there is a Metropolitan Borough of Wirral. A publisher's location is a town or city, not some local government conglomeration. So, if the publisher were based on the Wirral, we should really put Birkenhead, Wallasey, Hoylake or wherever. I happen to know that there is a publisher named Wirral (Wirral Publications Ltd, 3rd floor, 2A Price Street, Birkenhead CH41 6JN), so we need to be clear which is meant: the name of the publisher, or the publisher's location. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:29, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

No web site - only ghits are those bloody useless directories that clutter the place up. The Wirral has always been a fairly Wirral oriented area, from long before the borough was thought of, so he probably just means Wirral. He gives his name as the publisher, but it doesn't look like spam to me, or there'd be an more specific address or a site. Peridon (talk) 13:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi redrose64

I am Mike McManus, I have added the Ultimate Allocations information following a fellow enthusiast recommending that I do so. As other books as shown for information and sources etc I thought it would be ok to do so, if this is against the rules I can remove them as mentioned or what can I do to make it official? Any help would be appreciated. To view information on the books please visit www.ultimate-allocations.co.uk Regards Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike61680 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

Many thanks for your input and putting me straight, I looked at the other titles and considered the possibility of an advertising issue so I left out any direct method of contact e.g. e-mail etc. Anyway, would it be in the best interest for me to delete all the entries and enquire further about authorised inclusion? The books are the complete record of all locomotive movements, steam, diesel and electric on Briish Railways stock lists from 1950-1968 with additional information from 1948-1950 as available. I have had no negative response from anyone who has purchased them since 1995 when they were first advertised on Steam World, then Railway Magazine and Model Rail. The website gives a good overall coverage of what you can expect from the individual volumes (6off). This is my first attempt at adding anything on Misplaced Pages and perhaps in hindsight I should have known better than to take it for granted that you can add information without any issues. Thanks again, please advise on deletion Mike61680 (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)mike61680

Hackney Central edit

Hi, I've left an explanation on the talk page for Hackney Central train station as to why I believe (a small portion of) the article is out of date. Hope that helps clarify. Thanks! --Lost tourist (Talk) 14:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

The Middy

I've had a go at expanding {{Mid-Suffolk Light Railway}}, but am not 100% sure of the location of Gipping Siding, any ideas?. One or two roads need naming too. Mjroots (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Definitely between Lambert's Lane LC and Brown St LC. As to the exact location, see

• Comfort, Nicholas (1997) . The Mid-Suffolk Light Railway. Locomotion Papers (3rd ed.). Headington: Oakwood Press. p. 55. ISBN 0 85361 509 8. LP22.

It was 2 miles from Haughley (by rail), three-quarters of a mile from the hamlet of Gipping and was near to a handful of farms and cottages. I would say most likely at grid reference TM072641, although exactly where I couldn't say. It doesn't appear to have been a passenger station - the 1919 timetable on p. 94 has only goods trains calling, and these only "when required". The symbol would therefore be  (exBST). --Redrose64 (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, diag improved further. Mjroots (talk) 13:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hawkhurst Branch Line

Do you have access to the British Library's online collection of C19th British newspapers (access via local library website in most cases)? I've not had a look yet, but there could be plenty of material to expand the background, building, opening and early operation of the line there. Mjroots (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Pernicious nonsense on Talk:Abigail and Brittany Hensel

The remarkably uninformed and borderline-moronic rambling speculations about how Abigail and Brittany Hensel might hypothetically change their religions has absolutely no relevance to improving the Misplaced Pages article, and no place on the article talk page. If I had been aware of the comment at the time it was made, I would have instantly zapped it without compunction, and left a note on the relevant user talk page. You guys were more tolerant, which helped move the conversation along to a conclusion, maybe -- but now that conversation is over, and that means that the offensive idiocy needs to be GONE from the article talk page, perpetually and for ever, the sooner the better! -- AnonMoos (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied at original thread, per User talk:Redrose64/Editnotice. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Why not look up at the headers near the top of Talk:Abigail and Brittany Hensel, where you have a veritable menu to choose from, including WP:BLP and WP:TPO, to start with... AnonMoos (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Isn't it about time to archive this page?? -- AnonMoos (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Former London Electric Railway stations

I noticed that you categorised the stations on the Morden extension of the Northern line and the rest of the City & South London Railway stations as being former London Electric Railway stations. Strictly speaking, this is incorrect. The LER was formed from the merger of the Baker Street & Waterloo Railway, the Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway and the Great Northern Piccadilly & Brompton Railway. To a certain extent, the LER name did come to be used informally in a broader context, but the extension to Morden was carried out by the City & South London Railway. Although this had been taken over by the UERL in 1913, it continued to exist as a separate company within the group with its own board until the formation of the LPTB in 1933, it was never merged with the LER.

The same is true for Central London Railway stations.--DavidCane (talk) 21:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I did consider both those carefully, and could see arguments both ways. Checking through

• Day, John R.; Reed, John (2008) . The Story of London's Underground (10th ed.). Harrow: Capital Transport. ISBN 978 1 85414 316 7. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

I could not find an explicit statement that the C&SLR and CLR remained separate until 1933, but did find "In 1913, the C&SLR became part of the Underground Group" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 47); "On 1st January 1913, the Central London Railway became a member of the Underground Group" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 59); "section of the Central London Railway between Bank and Liverpool Street, opened six months before the line became part of the Underground Group" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 81); "The Underground Group had purchased the line in 1913" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 90). --Redrose64 (talk) 13:02, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I researched this when I wrote the Central London Railway and City & South London Railway articles. All of the acts presented to parliament for permissions to carry out works or to make extensions to the lines were in the names of the original companies. This contrasts with the extensions of the Piccadilly and and Bakerloo which were done under the name of the LER. The List of transport undertakings transferred to the London Passenger Transport Board shows that the CLR and C&SLR were still in existence when the LPTB was formed in 1933.--DavidCane (talk) 17:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I've moved the stations between Clapham South and Morden from Category:Former London Electric Railway stations to Category:Former City and South London Railway stations. That leaves four stations in the former - Arnos Grove, Bounds Green, Oakwood (all Piccadilly Line) and Paddington (Bakerloo). I expect this quantity to increase in the next few days with the 1910-33 extensions to the Bakerloo, Northern and Piccadilly lines. I didn't find any Central Line stations in Category:Former London Electric Railway stations. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost interview

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject London Transport for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters (talk) 02:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Reminder: This interview will be published this coming Monday. Your input is appreciated. – SMasters (talk) 04:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Letter-NumberCombination

Template:Letter-NumberCombination has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(ل)ˀ Contribs. 23:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Ashford railway works‎

Your edit summary for this article mentioned a section being a derail. I found that humorous. i kan reed (talk) 17:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

It did? Where? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it said "detail". Nevermind, that's completely unfunny. Sorry to have bothered you. i kan reed (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

NR symbol

Just to make things clear, the NR logo was removed from being along side the overground one (I don't know which by user) so I had to re-add the NR logo at stations which share the services as no NR logo was shown. It seems that the logo has been re-added along side. Likelife (talk) 21:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Mmm. Well, I do think that having any symbols is unnecessary, except in cases where two stations on different systems have separate articles (e.g. on the various West Hampsteads it's a quick visual reminder that you've reached the right one). But two NR symbols very close together looks sloppy. I'm not on a crusade to remove all the symbols though: should people wish that, we can easily amend the infobox templates. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

We should centralise this. See WT:UKRAIL#Symbols, London Overground and National Rail Simply south...... eating shoes for 5 years So much for ER 22:03, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I completely understand and I am also unsure if its necessary. I've also added a comment about whether the logo(s) are needed to the new talk section created by User:SS. Likelife (talk) 22:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

RE Ashford Railway Works

re your undoing of my additions:

Much of the info I added was specific to the locos built at Ashford and gave info on what happened to these units and therefore I felt would round out the history of the products of the works. I accept errors must be corrected but don't believe wholesale deletion was appropriate, however I defer to your opinion.

I will not re-instate, c'est la vie :-)

If the table isn't the correct place for info (what and where) on Ashford loco's that still exist and are therefore an enduring testament to the 1,000's of men and women of the works then do you think a para at the end of the article would be appropriate?

Wikikipper (talk) 22:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

My edit summary stated "sorry, but this sort of detail (some of which is incorrect) belongs on the individual class articles, not on a summary list". If you look at the table, in the first column of each row there is a link to the relevant locomotive class; follow that, and you will most likely find that the article on the specific class already has the relevant information. If it's not there, it may be added: but the information should be sourced, see WP:REFBEGIN. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Whilst the articles on the various classes do give information on surviving loco's, having read through them (using the links from the table) it is not always readily apparent that any of the preserved engines are Ashford products. It struck me as a casually interested reader of the Ashford Works article page to pose the question: What happened to these locos.? I therefore thought a specific summary (or additional section) on the Ashford page giving info on surviving Ashford locos might be useful - I recall how proud my grandfather was to draw my attention to the Ashford made D-class loco at the NRM. You seem to disagree, so I guess I'll let it rest. :-) Wikikipper (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Knockholt railway station

Hi, Redrose64. Just so you know, I saw your note regarding the need for page numbers for the reference of the history of Knockholt railway station and have now added them. Regards Rickedmo (talk) 23:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Heilmann locomotive

I've just discovered the Heilmann steam-electric locomotives! Will write an article tonight, but wondered how to describe the wheel arrangement. As electric locomotives, Do-Do fits the bill, but as steam locomotives, would they be 0-(2-2-2-2)-(2-2-2-2)-0 locomotives - all wheels were powered by there were no connecting rods. The locomotives were not articulated. Thoughts? Mjroots (talk) 07:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

There does not seem to have been any mechanical connection between the pistons and the wheels, so I don't think that giving a Whyte-type wheel arrangement is applicable. I would say that we can consider the analogous situation of a Diesel locomotive: for those with rigid frames and mechanical transmission, a Whyte wheel arrangement is usually given, but for those with bogies and electric transmission, we generally use the continental system.

Here, we have both bogies and an electric transmission, so I think we can ignore the fact that the generator is driven by a steam engine and not a Diesel engine, so in the absence of sources explicitly stating the wheel arrangement, we go with what we can determine from the contemporary description: "two four-axle bogie trucks; each of the eight axles being actuated by an axle-wound motor". Under the UIC notation, a loco with four powered axles in one frame is D; two four-axle bogies is D'D', and it's clear that each axle is individually driven by traction motors so we use "o", which gives Do'Do'. I don't think that anybody will put up a serious argument against that. You will need to create Category:Do-Do locomotives analogous to Category:Co-Co locomotives and Category:D-D locomotives; you may also wish to create the page Do-Do locomotives analogous to Co-Co locomotives, but since there isn't a D-D locomotives, it's probably not necessary in this case. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree with Do'Do'. Evidence is pretty clear that they were bogies and that there were separate traction motors - that in itself must have been quite unusual at this time? Whyte notation just isn't flexible enough to make sense for anything not a "Stephenson" locomotive. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

What you say makes sense in that the wheels were not driven directly by the steam engine. I was thinking of the LNWR compounds which were a 2-(2-2)-2 wheel arrangement, but looked outwardly like a 2-4-2 sans coupling rods. I'll stick to Do-Do for these. Mjroots (talk) 15:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Do-Do is something of a British notation; these being French, I'd say it was probably a good idea to also give the axle arrangement under the French convention. According to fr:Classification des locomotives#Locomotives électriques et thermiques, the French system is the same as UIC, i.e. Do'Do'. You might be able to get away with putting |aarwheels=D-D |uicclass=Do'Do' in the infobox, Do-Do elsewhere.

I didn't mention earlier, but this is an ideal opportunity to use |transmission= and related parameters of {{infobox locomotive}} for a steam loco. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I've made a start at Heilmann locomotive. Mjroots (talk) 17:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

L&Y Class 8

Thanks for your response re L&Y Class 8. Page numbers now added for the specific references. Masons remark is at the bottom of p80 (1975 edition) and the number of LMS classes is mentioned in LMS profiles at bottom LH of p80. (co-incidence)

I also corrected the as-built driving wheel diameters. See Mason p73 "It emerged from Horwich Works in June 1908, the precursor of 20 engines..........with 6ft 3 in coupled wheels" Nock pp 131-132 "introduced in 1908..................Their leading dimensions..........6ft 3in coupled wheels......

(CharlesMoor (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC))

DLR Stratford International extension

I got the information for the opening date and service patterns of the Docklands Light Railway Stratford International extension from IanVistis website, which I referenced and the DLR press room, in an email sent on 16/08/11, which I have pasted below:

Dear George

The Stratford International extension is due to open in the next few weeks, but I am currently unable to confirm a date.

The DLR services will operate Monday-Saturday between 05.30-00.30 and on Sundays between 07.00-23.30 Services will operate between Stratford International and Woolwich Arsenal via Canning Town during peak hours (06.30- 09.30 and 16.00-19.00 on weekdays). Outside of peak times, trains will operate via Canning Town through to Beckton. Trains on the new route run approximately every 8 minutes to Woolwich Arsenal and Beckton.

Trust that this addresses your queries.

Thanks, Myriam WalburMy@tfl.gov.uk]

So if you could put everthing back to how I left it, that would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you. George Moore 1995. — Preceding unsigned comment added by George Moore 1995 (talk • contribs) 10:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately private emails don't count as published sources, and so are inadmissible, per the policy on verifiability. Please see WP:Referencing for beginners and WP:Citing sources to see how to add references to your edits. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I put a reference to the Ian Visits website. When the extension opens, could you please put everything back? And the email was from DLR. George Moore 1995 George Moore 1995 (talk) 11:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have again looked through those of your edits which I undid, and I cannot find any evidence that you gave "the Ian Visits website" as a reference - nor that you provided any other source. It doesn't matter who the email was from - emails are not (generally speaking) published, and so do not fall within the requirement for reliable, third-party, published sources. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion.

Hello,

An article you have helped edit, Confirmation and overclaiming of aerial victories during World War II (which was formerly entitled "Confirmation and overclaiming of aerial victories") has been proposed for deletion.

Georgejdorner (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm hardly a major contributor. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:02, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Weaving

Talk:Weaving I have placed a proposal there you may wish to comment on --ClemRutter (talk) 10:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Happy Birthday for a few days ago then. I suppose it isn't all that unusual as Modern Railways's next month edition usually comes through my door around the 20th of each month. Simply south...... creating lakes for 5 years 20:14, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Somerset cricketers in WP:Somerset?

I've started a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Somerset#Somerset cricketers. Harrias 20:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Followup RFA question

Did you take a look at Kunwar Amar in determining that the rest of the articles in the Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as importance or significance not asserted were properly included? (The creator did remove the tag briefly between my question and your answer, so its possible it wasn't there when you looked) Monty₈₄₅ 18:32, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes; the version that I examined was this one. He's a contestant on a TV show; this is demonstrated by the sole ref. But are contestants important? I thought that the article subject needed to have won the contest. Similarly, he's an actor - but has he won any awards? Once we're past the lede, things quickly deteriorate. His birth (which is split over two sections) is put across as some kind of unusual, even miraculous, event, and trivial events are hyped up - such as attending an audition. Sentences like "Kuwar Amar was Even a Dance Teacher in Some Secondary School , where he teaches Dancing Styles to Kids" are vague. Which school? Did he get a write-up in the press about this teaching work? Sorry, but if I had come across this at AFD I'd have !voted Delete. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:14, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding voting to delete at AfD, fair enough. But my concern is that at the CSD stage, the rules for deletion are much more restrictive. To delete an article under CSD criteria A7 requires that the article contain no claim of importance. Claim of importance is a far lower standard then notability, and while being an actor on Dil Dosti Dance may or may not be enough to establish notability, it is enough to qualify as a claim of importance. When considering A7, claims of importance also need no references. Monty₈₄₅ 19:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Reliable source

Hi,

The 'reliable' source were my late father's notes, written during the 50's and 60's when he lived and worked in West Hampshire. I have provided information to Nigel Bray who wrote the recent volume on the S&DJR, you will find me credited in the book. Amateur historians have always been the core of research on railways and often provide a more accurate source than official company records. A small part of my father's collection of images of the S&DJR has recently been published on-line, although many are the work of other photographers nevertheless my father created one of the most comprehensive collection of images of the S&DJR.

Tim Hale — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altezeitgruppe (talk • contribs) 18:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I'm afraid that use of personal notes is inadmissible, because they aren't published - see the policy on verifiability. They might also be seen to fall foul of the policy on original research. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:42, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

The notes were published- they were used by Nigel Bray in the Kestrel Publications book, if you care to examine the list of contributors in the book, you will find my name. Perhaps, you might modify my source to the Nigel Bray book?

I also believe that my father published observations in the Railway Magazine however these are not in my possession as I only have his personal notes.

Where do you think authors obtain their information?

Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.164.18 (talk) 20:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

If your father's notes were used to write a published work, then that published work should be used as the ref source, because I could go to a public library and ask to borrow that book, but I can't ask to borrow the notes. Accordingly, you should indicate which book that is, and on which page of that book, against each piece of information. I see that a book by Bray and published by Kestrel is already listed at the bottom of the article (in the Sources section). Assuming that this is the book to which you refer, what you need to do is to add some suitable reference marks denoting that this is the source, and where in that source the information is to be found - i.e. the page numbers.

If you look at other sections in the article - for example, the one following, titled Closure, you'll see several numbers enclosed in square brackets, and superscripted. These are the reference marks. Observe that the first of these occurs at the end of the second paragraph ("claiming it was losing £100 a mile per week.") Click on the button for that section, and find the same passage. You'll see that this ends as follows:

claiming it was losing £100 a mile per week{{sfn|Bray|2010|p=61}}.

The {{sfn}} template is a method for creating shortened footnotes; and it is given the surnames of up to four authors, the publication year, and the page number - this last is indicated as |p= if one page is relevant, but |pp= if two or more pages.

I don't have Bray's book, but let's assume, for example, that your passage about agriculture was drawn from material on pages 123–4 of the book, and the passage about commuter housing is on p. 567. You would amend the paragraph like this:

as were strawberries and other soft fruit,{{sfn|Bray|2010|pp=123–4}}

and horses a priority for the local landowners.{{sfn|Bray|2010|p=567}}

This will be consistent with the rest of the article, and is in line with our policy on verifiability.

If you know which issues of The Railway Magazine that the article appeared in, or even just the year, I will be happy to have a look in my pile of back issues: I am certain to have it, unless it was published more than 71 years ago (my most recent gap is the October 1940 issue).

Authors obtain their information from primary sources, such as those notes. But Misplaced Pages is not a publisher of original thought, it obtains its information from secondary sources - published works available to the general public. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

RfA question

I'm writing to offer a bit of an apology. I hadn't intended my RfA question to you to be a trick question. Unfortunately, it did (that would be my own ignorance of CSD showing through); fortunately, you caught it! The question was based on an actual situation which I was a part of not too long ago. The true situation was very similar to my question, the main difference being that the forum was WP:DRV, not WP:AFD.

Anyway, I am thoroughly impressed with your nomination. I have !voted in your favor, and I expect you to make an excellent admin. Ozob (talk) 21:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Coordinates vs Lat Long in infoboxes

Red, I see you made some changes to the cemetery infobox. Looks like you are quite knowledgeable in this stuff. I've raised a question as to whether both Coordinates and Lat/Long is needed (or desirable) in infoboxes. Seems to me that Coordinates simply asks for Lat/Long data. If so, why do we have both parameters? And what will change if we delete the Lat/Long parameters? The cemetery box is one that caught my attention, but I think the Coord Lat/Long parameters exist in many more boxes. Can you assist? Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

- Damian Zaremba 04:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Your RfA

It looks like your RfA will be successful, and that puts me in the awkward situation of being the first to oppose it. I just wanted to send you a short note to congratulate you on the successful RfA, and I hope you won't take my opposition personally. My oppose was mostly based on principle, and realistically I think you'll do just fine. Cheers. —SW—  23:48, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you think it's right to oppose a candidate on principle when "realistically you think they'll do just fine"? I think RfA would be a better place if people stopped opposing on a principle and commented after taking careful consideration of all the evidence. In the end, it all comes back to whether the candidate can be trusted or not. I notice that several times recently you have been among a small minority of opposers at an RfA - perhaps it would be fruitful to reconsider your criteria? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

In my last 50 RfA votes, there is exactly one other RfA where I was in a small minority of opposers, and that was Worm That Turned. There are exactly two other successful RfA's that I opposed, but I was hardly in a small minority (one had 21 opposes, the other had 16). So, this is not the grand pattern that you make it out to be. If I see a candidate who expresses an intention to work in an area, but has little or no demonstrated experience in that area, I'm going to oppose. I really don't see anything wrong with that, and I have no plans to change that criterion (and just about every other oppose at the RfA was based on the same logic). The only reason I posted this message is because RedRose made it clear that he would ease into deletion slowly and carefully, and he's obviously competent so I doubt there will be many problems. Sheesh, I can't even post a friendly, cordial message without an argument? —SW—  14:20, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure Redrose will take your comment with the good will that was intended. And I apologise for suggesting there was a pattern - I don't take part in many RfAs and WTT must have been the other one I had noticed recently. It was not my intention to start an argument, as you put it, but merely to have a friendly discussion and encourage you to reflect. It was quite right for you and others to point out the possible pitfalls of starting to work in deletion with little experience in this area, and Redrose will do well to heed this advice. But by opposing over this, you have effectively ignored 41,000 edits which say one thing (the candidate will make a good admin) over a single edit which might possibly indicate a problem. Rather than looking at one issue, I'm suggesting that we should look at the whole picture and, in this case, that picture was very clear to a lot of us. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Where did my other 2000+ edits come from? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Haha, no idea. Fixed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		Home-Made Barnstar
		Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Redrose64; your answer to q5 was brilliant. John (talk) 06:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

You are now an administrator

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to get in touch on my talk page. WJBscribe (talk) 13:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Yay! --Redrose64 (talk) 13:36, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Like JORGENEV 13:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations. Sorry I missed the RfA, I've been tied up with other Wiki issues, but I'm sure your very deserving. Good job! Worm · (talk) 14:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratz!

Congrats Redrose! HurricaneFan25 13:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the most hated Wikipedians club! Your uniform has been issued. Mjroots (talk) 13:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! --Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

A little Dr Who memorabilia for you

Whoosh that is a big mop and bucket. You certainly deserve them and I send my congrats too. In my meanderings around wikipedia I came across this article Aristide Bruant with the accompanying picture by Lautrec. It reminded me of a Dr Who poster that I bought at the 20th anniversary convention in Chicago in 1983 (can 28 years really have gone by?) Unfortunately, it went astray in a long distance move that I endured back in the 90's but thanks to the internet I was able to track down this website which has a picture of it. I enjoy how creative fans of a given show can be and I thought that I would share it with you to celebrate your successful RFA. Cheers and best wishes in the days ahead. MarnetteD | Talk 13:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the beer. A tad early for happy hour my time but I'm sure that when I was young and in college I TGIF'd at this time of the morning. Thanks again. MarnetteD | Talk 15:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I'm proud of you for your sucessful RfA. In order please remove the other rights on your userbox becuase you are now an admin and you can keep your admin userbox. Thanks Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For the beer, and congratulations. I'm sure that being an admin need be no more stressful than being an un-mopped janitor, but you can be more effective. Rich Farmbrough, 14:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC).

Well done on your successful adminship, Redrose. It was a massive ratio of supports! Jaguar (talk) 14:53, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations - hope you have a productive time as an Admin. Thanks for the beer. --Stewart 15:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, too, thanks for the beer, it was good. Here is your mug back... --rogerd (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats. You know you have a week to warm up before you have to start meeting the daily quota for indefinite blocks, random deletions, unnecessary full protection, and secret messages to other admins. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 15:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations and enjoy using the tools. --John (talk) 15:20, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Was a little early for beer, a cup of tea would have been nicer, but I drank it anyway. Cheers. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats on your successful adminship! Use your tools wisely. Cheers, —mc10 (t/c) 15:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations. I hope you find the new tools useful. Just remember these rules:

1. have patience with others.
2. Don't be quick to judge other actions. Usually it's an honest mistake.
3. If you get offended try to stay calm. Don't threaten. Vandals love when editors like you get frustrated. So keep your cool and they'll turn away.

If you play by these rules you'll be able have a lot of pleasure editing with the aid of your new tools. –BuickCenturyDriver 17:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey; thanks for the beer! I hope I can't get blocked for editing drunk! :P Tofutwitch11 19:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, and thanks for the beer! All those new buttons sound overwhelming. Why don't you test them out here? :P To anyone who's reviewing my contribs in consideration of my RfA...that was a joke. Swarm 06:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for the beer (London Pride for me, ta) and here's wishing you well. Plutonium27 14:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

For being a all new admin ready to fight the deeds of the fearful vandals! :D Btw I think bubble tea will be more healthier than beer, as you need some energy to fight the vandals. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 15:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! Use the tools wisely and please don't delete Great Malvern Station :) --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

You're screwed

RfA Condolences

It is with sorrow that I see your RfA was condemned to giving you the extra buttons. As I've frequently said, those silly enough to stand for RfA are singularly unqualified to be an administrator. As painful as that is, it gets worse. You will soon be a cynical tyrant who ignores the bleating cud chewing scum known as us non-admins. I see from your userpage that you already suffer from editcountitis, barnstaritis, and userboxitis. I think your immune system is compromised, and you will soon be suffering from adminitis. (add happy smileys as necessary to the above if you're humor organ is suffering malhumoritis!) In all seriousness; congratulations. :) Hammersoft (talk) 17:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Cheers

If you need any help or advice while settling into your new role, don't hesitate to ask. I probably know someone who will know the answer... 8-) Peridon (talk) 17:55, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

If I need assistance, please help. Good contributions. Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 21:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions on moving files to Wikimedia Commons

I added {{db-author}} to the two files mentioned for deletion. Any comments on the files mentioned for moving to Wikimedia? --DThomsen8 (talk) 18:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Not yet: I am presently examining File:AbandonedDraft1.png, it may well have been deleted by the time that you read this.

As an alternative to the <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags, you can use the {{tlx}} template to produce a template link without transcluding the template itself, also note that we typically use the word "Commons" to refer to Wikimedia Commons, because Wikimedia covers many other sites - including the English Misplaced Pages. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Have now replied at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Images and Media#Questions on moving files to Wikimedia Commons. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:40, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Belated congrats

Hi Redrose. Congratulations on a sucessful RfA. I was pleased to see you had broad support from users of different areas of the project, and really strong support from those that hang out in VPT. I recall seing you when I first discovered VPT and, at the time, I thought your were a Dev and just assumed you had the Admin bit too because of your experience and knowledge. It wasn't until later I discovered you weren't and I thought you really should be an Admin.

Sorry about the hub-bub I caused for mentioning the nominators !votes. I was going to leave a note for Martin and Rich, but I know that some RfA regulars are overly concerned about canvassing. That's why I left a note in my comment, so it would be above-board for all to see. I figured Rich and Martin had your RfA watchlisted and would see my note. I had no idea that my note would cause the little bit of drama that it did, so I aplogize for that. Glad to see it all got sorted out.

Anyhoo, I'm quite pleased that you finally got the bit as your are one of our best contributors and your help with administrative tasks will be very much appreciated. Thanks for your support of the project and for the beer too. Best regards. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 18:55, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Tees railway viaduct and a welcoming attitude

Well done, Redrose64, and good luck with your shiny new mop and bucket. Cullen Let's discuss it 21:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thank you for helping a clueless new user out with a template and not getting discouraged Bar Code Symmetry (Talk) 23:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Redrose64! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Recent comment on my talk page.

When providing feedback about any edit that an editor makes, it is absolutely vital that you provide no clue whatsoever as to what edit you have a problem with. I am pleased to note that you are maintaining this important tradition. 109.156.49.202 (talk) 16:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on user talk page. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Articles containing overlapping coordinates

I appreciate your help with removing redundant coordinates from articles. Thanks to you, I feel like we've finally got some traction. I'm working the report alphabetically and am now in the N's. Let me know if you'd like to further coordinate our efforts. And keep up the good work! Best regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 19:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Er, I'm up to the Ns too! I stopped at Nofei Nehemia because Firefox was refusing to preserve the alpha sort when returning to the page, and I was getting annoyed at having to go to top, click the sort arrows, and page down twice again. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

In that case, I'll start working backwards from the end of the list. Thanks again. —Stepheng3 (talk) 20:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Redrose64 (talk) 17:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

On the list prepared today, I've done 34 of the 36. The two I didn't do are Bhajanpura (which I also skipped last time), because it uses {{Infobox Indian Jurisdiction}}, a template currently being deleted; and Kirtland Temple, because I can't find the second set of coordinates. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all that. Deletion of {{Infobox Indian jurisdiction}} has been in process for some time. I'll see if I can do those last two. —Stepheng3 (talk) 05:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Original Research

Maybe you should try to find out what original research is. If I determine the distance between two points using publicly available documentation (like an Ordnance Survey map) that would be establishing information from verifiable sources (Misplaced Pages calls it a citation). If I were to physically measure the distance myself, that would be Original Research. The Tube Map published by LUL clearly shows no stations on the Metropolitan Line between Finchley Road and Wembley Park (and that is a perfectly valid cite). What stations are on the adjacent line is totally irrelevant. You claim that there are platform facings certainly sounds like Original Research to me, but so what? The Metropolitan Line does not stop at any stations between Finchley Road and Wembley Park. The Tube map clearly says so. You haven't claimed that the distance between Chesham and Chalfont and Latimer was Original Research so you are also applying double standards. It can't be anything else as the supplied (archived) cite doesn't even mention it.

It's not adviseable to reply on my user talk page because my IP address has a habit of changing without warning (I have no control over this, though it has been a lot more stable since I changed to fibre optic broadband). 109.156.49.202 (talk) 13:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Station Names in other languages

Something for you to think about, Asarlaí (talk · contribs) has been adding Gaelic and Scots names to a lot of station articles. You might like to check them out. I am almost certain that Scots does not appear on any station sign, and Gaelic is appearing at more Scottish station, but I am certain most modified have not been so named. My understanding of the template was that it was only added when applied to the station sign. Thoughts? --Stewart 15:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I have taken this to WT:TIS#Scots and Gaelic names on railway station articles, because I think it deserves a wider audience. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this. --Stewart 16:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Class D1/1

I have found some more definite allocation information on this class of shunter locos. This is detailed on the talk page for that class. Can you review and if happy remove the dubious? Many thanks. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

Thanks for the beer

Sorry for the delayed reply. Thanks so much for the lovely beer :) And congrats on the adminship. Wifione 04:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

WikiPuppies! (bark) 22:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback number #2, same place. WikiPuppies! (bark) 22:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Girnar

I notice you fixed this page a couple of weeks ago; in the process you transported the mountain into the Atlantic Ocean! Another miracle! Anyway I thought it might amuse you. Moonraker12 (talk) 15:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Aha, sorry. The page had shown up on Misplaced Pages:Database reports/Articles containing overlapping coordinates (row 122), i.e there were two sets of coords competing for the same spot at upper right. These are usually caused by there being a {{coord}} somewhere on the page (not necessarily in the infobox, although it was in this case), and also some lat/long params in the infobox. In such cases I examine several items to check which is "correct". Note that before my change, the infobox had the following:

| lat_d             = 21 | lat_m = 29 | lat_s = 41 | lat_NS = N
| lat_m             = 
| lat_s             = 
| lat_NS            = 
| long_d            = 70 | long_m = 30 | long_s = 20 | long_EW = W
| long_m            = 
| long_s            = 
| long_EW           = 

that is, six of the parameters were specified twice each. In such cases, the MediaWiki software ignores the first of each pair - even when the second of the pair is blank. Thus, my removal of the blank ones made the non-blank ones visible, including the error of |long_EW=W. Clearly I overlooked the hemisphere error here because I felt that the removal of |coordinates={{coord|21|29|41|N|70|30|20|E|display=title}} was safe. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

No wories; the mistake was already there (as you've seen), your edit only uncovered it. I just thought it was a laugh.

Incidentally, , according to Geohack the new location is right by the site of Red Rackham’s treasure, if that makes any sense to you...Moonraker12 (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes... but was the position based upon the Greenwich meridian, or the Paris meridian? (p. 23) --Redrose64 (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah! Well the article (sacred mountains in India, and Belgian cartoon stories; only on wikipaedia, hey?) gives both positions, but only the Greenwich one shows the treasure (cunning blighters!). Anyway, keep smiling, Moonraker12 (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

John Rhys-Davies

Dear Redrose,

I met John Davies (before he added his father's name Rhys) in about 1966, shortly after he married my cousin Suzanne Wilkinson and was still just a repertory actor. He told me himself that he had been born in Salisbury and baptized at home in Ammanford. There: straight from the horse's mouth, so no discussion needed. I think you'll find his birth was registered in Salisbury, too (try the Findmypast web site).

Do I have a talk page? Can't find it. I was playing with computers when you were still in the cradle, which means I'm what the Germans call vorbelastet: they've changed faster than I can keep pace.

Weehugh (talk) 07:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC) Hugh

Yes, every user has a talk page; the link to that is the words User talk: followed by the user name, so yours is User talk:Weehugh - at present, you are reading my talk page.

When logged in, you will see at upper right, six links as follows:

Weehugh My talk My preferences My watchlist My contributions Log out

Second from the left is My talk, which is the direct link to your talk page.

In addition to that, every article has a talk page, and its name is Talk: followed by the article name, e.g. Talk:John Rhys-Davies. At the top of the article you will see some tabs; the two on the left are titled Article and Discussion; on the John Rhys-Davies article, the Discussion tab leads to the talk page specific to the article. If you follow that, you will find that there are presently 15 discussion topics (some are quite old, so are effectively dead). The 14th of these, titled What? is the most recent one concerning place of birth.

To address the main point. Per the policy on living persons and the policy on verifiability, in order for the article to state that he was born in Salisbury, you need to provide a reliable source which not only disprove the existing sources which state Ammanford, but also explicitly states that he was born in Salisbury. See WP:SOURCES, where it states

Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form); unpublished materials are not considered reliable. Sources should directly support the material presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. In general, the best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments; as a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Content related to living people or medicine should be sourced especially carefully.

Therefore, personal knowledge and word-of-mouth information are inadmissible, because they are not "third-party, published sources". --Redrose64 (talk) 09:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Template for AfD

Hi Redrose, I posted the following message at the WP:AFD talk page nearly 3 days ago and didn't get any responses. I thought maybe you could give me your personal opinion of the template. Thanks. Magister Scienta 01:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I've designed a very useful (it is of course also space-efficent and visually pleasing) new template that displays links to recent AfD logs. To see of an example of what it looks like, see the 11/21 log here (it's the first one on the page). I am looking for a consensus to put this template on the top of all log pages of AfD's for a particular day. I encourage people to take a look at its code (I've triple-checked it but new eyes are always good). I hope others agree with me that this template would be a valuable addition to the log pages as an added, unobtrusive convenience. Thanks.

Socks

If it looks like a cheesy sock and smells like a cheesy sock, then the likelihood is that it's a cheesy sock. Might be worth raising at ANI for more experienced admins to take a look at. BTW, have you unlocked the case to your banhammer yet? Mjroots (talk) 12:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

re: Strange category name

Category:Categories named after districts of England seems strange but is a standard way of naming "eponymous categories" (Category:Eponymous categories). Category:Districts of England should contain the articles about the districts. e.g. Adur (district), and Category:Categories named after districts of England should the categories, e.g. Category:Adur. Tim! (talk) 08:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

TBR1

Hi. My group and I have been editting the TBR1 page in wikipedia for our Neuroscience class. We noticed that you had edited it severaal times and would appreciate any advice you have on how to make it better. We are trying to make it a Good Article according to Misplaced Pages standards. Thanks.

JaimeeDavis (talk) 21:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

One edit is not "severaal times". --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi you left me a message regarding Chippenham Station. I assumed you could write all platforms as it is the same with Portsmouth Harbour? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chip123456 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Coronation Street timeline

Coronation Street timeline page....reference ....24 October 2011 Added new information. Having problems controlling text format, needs control characters to sort out the word spacing and line breaks ( * character has thrown the spacing off )!!!!! Cannot find the ones to do the corrections. I have got rusty on editing !!!!!! BTW I am still looking for non copyright photo's of Sacha Parkinson and Brooke Vincent, have asked their agent to look see at (Wiki) their entries and verify the facts stated, plus please send me non copyright photo's of both actresses. Did you know that Parkinson has quite Corrie this month ? Corrie will not be worth watching soon!!!!! PS I read somewhere your into railways.....do you do model trains too.....I do Z scale ( the tiny German stuff )costs a small fortune !!!!Thanxs gren500Gren500 (talk) 06:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC) Gren500 (talk) 03:56, 9 Decemberies ande Wiki entrk seloor agent to i asked the 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gren500 (talk • Contributions/Gren500) 03:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC non copyrightor)

Regarding formatting at Coronation Street timeline: most of this is set out as a series of bulleted lists, where each list entry starts with an asterisk * - see Help:List, also Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Lists (in particular, WP:BULLETLIST) for further information.

One problem is that you are not always adding the asterisk at the start of the entry. Another is that you are starting new lines at peculiar intervals - when you reach the right-hand side of the edit box, just keep typing, and it'll sort the word wrapping automatically. A split line within a bulleted list will terminate the list and treat subsequent text as a normal paragraph. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clean up of my text problems, and the info on the solutions.Gren500 (talk) 22:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Doctor Who Episode Improvement Idea

As a member of WP:WHO, I thought you may be interested in this idea. No one has replied yet. Glimmer721 17:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dearne Valley Railway RDT

Template:Dearne Valley Railway RDT has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 07:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Scotrail articles

User:RGloucester has moved ScotRail to ScotRail (1997-2004) and First ScotRail to ScotRail (2004-present) without discussion. In the first case, the proposed change had been discussion with no agreement to change. This should really have been discussed at WP:TIS before the change, which I have suggested. Can you get them back to some sort of order, since the first article covered the whole period from the creation of the ScotRail, and it is now split. --Stewart 22:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Have you informed the user of their error? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Working my way through WP:TIS notification, user was next, however an anon IP is now editing the articles. --Stewart 22:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Restored status quo ante regarding names; move protected for 1 week but I'll lift that should TIS so desire. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

a caution about WP:AWB and day=

Hi. Please see User talk:GoingBatty#WP:AWB breaking footnote links. You made several similar edits:

• Diff of Template:Cite doi/10.1126.2Fscience.215.4532.499
• Diff of Template:Cite doi/10.1126.2Fscience.212.4491.159

These did not cause breakages, but I thought you should be aware of the issue. Best, Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't use AWB. I prefer to make my own decisions regarding what edits to make. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

That's interesting. I didn't say you used AWB, but GoingBatty's edits were done with it. I'll use scripts and such, but do try to be careful. Thanks for illustrating a better approach to this issue. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

While I used AWB's replace template functionality to fix many articles in Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters, AWB has no functionality to change day/month/year parameters to date parameters. Therefore, my edits to Ithaca Chasma and Tethys (moon) were done manually inside AWB, just the same if I had done it in my web browser. It took me a lot of time to figure out the issue with my edits, as it's not obvious with my web browser in full screen mode. Thank you Tycho for pointing out my error, and thank you Redrose for fixing these pages properly. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

As I said on your talkpage, I assume it was AWB because of the edit summary. I've never used it myself. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

← I've been thinking about the best uses of {{sfnRef}}. I believe that the inline usages should be 'short' and that's why I have often used sfnRef. If editors see {sfn | last1 | last2 | last3 | last4 | year | p=} and the names are long and hard to spell, they won't like sfn and may prefer ref name= using a short name. So I use sfnRef and one or two names and the year. I'd be interested in other views on this. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you take that to Template talk:sfn please? My talk page is not the best place for such discussions. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense. See you there. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Sir John Beddington - Fukushima incident

Hi. I work In Sir John Beddington's Government Office for Science, and a concern was raised about the accuracy of how the reporting of the Fukushima incident is portrayed on the page.

The 'controversy' section on John Beddington's entry on Misplaced Pages is misrepresentative. The Independent article that much of the section quotes (ref 16) is fundamentally inaccurate, so whilst the wiki quotes the Independent article accurately it is quoting flawed information. The key statement is that Beddington's advice "resulted in a significant delay in evacuating British citizens from Japan." This is wrong. The advice of the Science Advisory Group in Emergencies (SAGE), which Beddington Chairs, throughout was that there was no need for British citizens to evacuate Tokyo. Consequently there was no recommendation from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) to do so.

The minutes from the SAGE meetings and the FCO's advice corroborate this. http://www.bis.gov.uk/go-science/science-in-government/global-issues/civil-contingencies http://ukinjapan.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=566406782

Furthermore, and following from this falsehood, the section in its entirety paints a wholly negative picture of the GCSA's response to the crisis when the reverse is true, as evidenced by the following:

- In the BBC Radio 4 programme Material World on 24 November 2011, Sir John Beddington’s response in communicating the risks during the Fukushima crisis was described by Lord Krebs, Chair of the House of Lords Science & Technology Committee as “exemplary” http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qyyb

- Michael Hanlon, then science editor of the Daily Mail, also had praise for Beddington’s response, saying he couldn’t have explained it more clearly. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1367289/Japan-earthquake-tsunami-Are-right-worry-nuclear-angle.html

Overall, it’s unfair for someone to have written this about John without our right of reply. I'd be very grateful for any advice at all about how we go about rectifying this in a transparent manner.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 11:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I have made just two edits to the article John Beddington, and I fail to see how either of them could cause you these concerns. The first was to fix misuse of the {{London Gazette}} template. The second was an edit concerned partly with the Manual of Style, and partly with correct English usage - we would say "Sir John", or "Beddington", never "Sir Beddington"; and when he was at school, he had not yet been knighted, so "Beddington" is the only valid form. I also moved one full stop in line with WP:REFPUNC.

Regarding the remainder of your comments above, it would be best if you were to note these on the article's discussion page, which is at Talk:John Beddington. In this way they will gain the attention of people more directly concerned with that article. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't accusing you of writing the text on Fukushima, it is simply that you were the last person to edit the page so most likely to be active! I was simply asking you if you could edit the page accordingly as for our office to do so would not be fair or unbiased. Do you suggest there's someone else I should approach?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 14:24, 15 December 2011

EDIT: OK, re-read your comments... I will add the to the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 15 December 2011‎

Hi again. I left a message on the Beddington talk page and have had no response. could you advise on what to do next? Thanks. Happydan.uk (talk) 12:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I am afraid that such matters are well outside my realm, so I have raised two requests for outside assistance - see Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Biography#John Beddington misrepresentation and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#John Beddington misrepresentation. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Happydan.uk (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Correction

Hi,

The source is from the Go! Cooperative Misplaced Pages site. I have out proposed now and it is stated that it is a proposal service. The source is reliable.--Chip123456 (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page, because that's where the thread started. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

You can also have a look on the GOCO website and look at newspaper websites. There are more than one reliable sources. --Chip123456 (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page, because that's where the thread started. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:27, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

they are reliable. I have collected lots of information from all different websites. It is reliable, which means that the information on the pages can be added.

Thank you for your help and advice it has been most appreciated. --Chip123456 (talk) 21:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

There is no need to start a new section for each reply. It is also best to reply on the thread that you are replying to: this avoids disjoint discussions and saves time for everybody. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Train

it is being directed though to the information page. Oxford shows future services as well. --Chip123456 (talk) 10:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

)

References

maybe you could assist adding a reference instead of undoing correct edits to the page. I did do my research before adding information to the Chippenham and Melksham article. References aren't extremely necessary as you can Click on the words to be directed to further information. --Chip123456 (talk) 16:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Why

I am again wondering why my edits were undone, they were correct. Maybe instead of you undoing them and warning me, you could of added the extra information instead of making me sound like a criminal! The edits were correct as I have done more research. If you have a problem with my edits just talk to me and then we can resolve the problem much more easily instead of having to make a big fuss over things. Other bits of advice advice you have given to me have been useful and you have also left good links, but next time there is a problem please just say. Thanks :). --Chip123456 (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Article Scotrail No Ticket

Hi I have tagged this article with deletion category G10 {{db-attack}}. Although it is only a page with a redirect to Linlithgow, I do not think the article title is appropriate. Thoughts? --Stewart 18:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:TIS

{{Talkback|Pencefn|WP TIS}}

Thanks, yes, already noticed - I watch talk pages that I post to. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Do you have an explanation?

Malleus Fatuorum 21:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

yes, and I rolled back myself within seconds. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm maybe a bit overly sensitive to this sort of thing, but I know that your reverting of my topic will be used in evidence against me, because you're an admin and I'm not. Please try to be more careful who you fuck off in future. Malleus Fatuorum 21:55, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Look, I'm really sorry for doing that, I don't try to "fuck off" anybody, and I certainly don't target you. It was an accident, and you can see from the screengrab at right just how close those buttons are. This was, in fact, only my second mistake of the type described here.

I'm certainly not gathering evidence against you; but any admin who might be doing so will see my self-rollback immediately after that and, if they have any sense, realise that it was my error, not yours. If they don't realise that, point them right here. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

You have more faith in your fellow admins than I do. Malleus Fatuorum 22:14, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The Claws of Axos

Please don't simply undo edits because you have misunderstood. The note regarding the TARDIS doors in the Claws of Axos is perfectly correct. You may want to view your copy of the DVD to verify it before you rush to undo the redo. You may also want to check the reference. If you wish to amend the text to make it clearer, that is a separate issue; but undoing correct text is not very helpful at all. Doubtless this earns me a ban of some kind. TVArchivistUK (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

First off, I didn't undo. You added a whole paragraph, most of which I left alone - I removed one sentence and amended another. Second, I didn't necessarily misunderstand: but let's take that aspect to Talk:The Claws of Axos#TARDIS doors. Third, I shouldn't need to check my DVD, that is WP:OR. Fourth, http://tardis.wikia.com/The_Claws_of_Axos is a wiki, and is therefore inadmissible as a ref, see WP:USERG. Fifth, I can't ban you. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:14, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

You may want to view the trailer for the upcoming DVD release of The Sensorites. Or wait for the release itself next month. Either way, you will see another example of the TARDIS doors opening directly onto the exterior, sans any interim vestibule or corridor. Another example underlining The Claws of Axos' unique TARDIS configuration. TVArchivistUK (talk) 05:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Chip123456

Howdy.

A few days ago, you started a thread on ANI - originally asking about 3RR, regarding Chippenham railway station and Chip123456 (talk · contribs).

In that thread, several people expressed concern about the editing of Chip123456.

The thread was archived. However, because Chip123456 has continued to edit in the same way, I've moved the thread out of the archive, given it a new heading, and added to it.

It is Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Chip123456.

The thread now does not concern you directly; it's all about Chip123456. However, I thought I'd let you know that I'd re-opened the discussion. Best,  Chzz  ►  17:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Tis the season

MarnetteD | Talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec11}} to your friends' talk pages.

Many thanks for all your work here at WikiP. I hope that your first months as an admin have not bee to maddening. Have a wonderful 2012. MarnetteD | Talk 22:31, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Advice

your advice was more of a telling off. I thought the discussion page was the talk Chippenham page. It was replied by the person who told me to go there in the beginning which I'd didn't want as he told me to find something else. Please look at the page carefully --Chip123456 (talk) 07:47, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Which advice? I have offered advice to you several times.

Talk pages are the same as discussion pages. The discussion page for any article is the article's name prefixed with "Talk:", so the discussion page for Chippenham railway station is Talk:Chippenham railway station. Replies to points raised on talk pages may be offered by anybody (except for those under a topic ban). When replying to anything, it is generally best to post beneath the thread to which you are replying, since it keeps discussion in one place - a fragmented discussion is very difficult to follow.

Which page do you believe I have not read carefully?

The following pages may help you: Help:Introduction to talk pages; Help:Using talk pages; Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

The replies on the talk page for Chippenham station. --Chip123456 (talk) 18:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not sure which of my questions above you refer to. Is it in answer to "Which advice?", or to "Which page do you believe I have not read carefully?"

I have made exactly two posts to Talk:Chippenham railway station. One was well over a year ago, and the other was not intended to be a "telling off", but pointers to two pages where the advice you asked for, i.e. how to add references, may be found; I included pointers to three other pages (the Misplaced Pages core policies) to help you understand why we do not encourage "anything goes" editing.

Should you require personal assistance from somebody experienced in such matters, you can follow the advice that Thryduulf gave at the very top of your talk page. When I was new to Misplaced Pages, I used the {{help me}} method several times. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi it was the answer to where it was. As I have said previously in a section the majority of your advice is v useful. The discussion of Chippenham I was referring to is that the person who said no previously said no again, --Chip123456 (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

time for some stuff

one nom and a bit more for you. Hope you can support what I've posted and there's also something about Bristol Parkway above Liverpool Central, don't forget that too! Tez011 (talk) 14:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Vale of Rheidol Railway

Would you mind having a quick look over the Vale of Rheidol Railway page? I've made quite a few edits recently and started referencing. Another pair of eyes would be helpful!  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 14:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

weird coincidence

That was a weird coincidence. I was literally editing Jennifer Rizzotti, because an image had been inexplicably removed, and it reappeared, while I was editing.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 23:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

inneresting

Hi, do you use a tool for adding citations? The reason that I ask is that several of your recent edits, such as this one, are using the |access-date= parameter, which puts the page into hidden Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters. The correct parameter to use is |accessdate=. intriguing - will have to investigate - normally I use no tool as such - nothing like learning on the job - so to speak - have a good new year - cheers SatuSuro 00:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

ahah - I see now - Mr or Mrs Goliath territory - first lets follow the trail:

• http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/16898385?q=railways+western+australia&c=book
• down to editions/versions
• click on cite this
• look at cite this record
• look at wikipedia at the bottom

... as mr zimmerman used to sing it aint me babe, it aint me youre looking for - its the smarty who configured the java applet that sits in the bowels (or brains) of the trove catalogue... ( heheh I say that cause their disclaimer Citations are automatically generated and may require some modification to conform to exact standards makes me think that is a good cop out - or it means one has to manually change each new cite... oh dear thats a lot of cites i have slavishly added without checking.... ) but they're out to lunch like most of the world - till next week.. or as some might put it - next year

thank you very much for alerting me to the fact - apologies for the lengthy reply SatuSuro 00:22, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 12:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

maybe but there you are floating across my wart list (aka watch) cleaning up my refs - I think either you or I need to break the news to the trove programmers they got it wrong - HNY btw SatuSuro 00:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done have sent em a message - hope they change it - sometime this year - despite the disclaimer SatuSuro 01:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

apologies - hadnt looked close enough - not fixed yet then? SatuSuro 05:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Happy new year and we will see you contributing in 2012 of the new year. We are hoping to see and help to make Misplaced Pages better! Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 22:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Plaxton Panorama Elite

Hi Redrose64

Thanks for your recent additions and corrections to Plaxton Panorama Elite. I just wanted to query part of it, which goes against what I'd believed to be true - though I have no direct evidence with which to challenge it.

You mention "earlier models with shallow windscreen" and "later models with deeper windscreen". I had always been under the impression that (for standard width vehicles) the windscreens (and rear screens for that matter) were the same size and shape throughout the production run, from G-reg right through to P-reg. As for the position of the destination box - from observation, I had always thought it was determined by the chassis type, with front-engined Bedfords and Fords tending to have it between the headlights, whereas mid-engined Bedfords, Leopards and Reliances had it immediately below the windscreen where there was more space.

However, as all of this is largely OR (observations and word of mouth) and I can't find any sources to back me up, I thought I'd better consult with you before I made any changes! Where did you get your info and do you have any further details?

Best wishes, Quackdave (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

—Northamerica1000 13:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

VIP Art Fair Misplaced Pages Page

Hi Redrose64 I am a Sotheby's Institute of Art grad student who is very familiar with VIP Art Fair and the recent developments at the company. Earlier today, I was attempting to update the file and may have jumped the gun by deleting the existing page. I was trying to update the information and take out both inaccuracies (ie VIP is not a virtual trade show but an art fair) and biases. I am clearly learning because my page was deleted within 5 minutes. I would like to repost but I do not want to cause further issues/harm. Please can you advise on the best course of action? Thank you, Evelyn96.239.59.144 (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The page VIP Art Fair has not been deleted. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, what I meant was that I deleted the previous post. And then the wrote in a new one. User MikeWazowski (not the original writer) then deleted mine, and put the former one back up and cited me for speedy deletion. I saw you had intervened so I was stepping away from the page for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.239.59.144 (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I didn't intervene. All I did was move the {{art-stub}} template to the bottom in line with WP:FOOTERS, and add a {{reflist}}. The latter was because either a {{reflist}} or a <references /> is mandatory for any article containing one or more <ref>...</ref> elements, and omission of that will cause the page to show in Category:Pages with missing references list.

As to removal of text that you entered, I suggest that you take up your concerns with the user who actually removed the content. You should be able to find out who that was by trying the "prev" links in the page history.

Regarding the speedy deletion request, according to the page history, the edit where speedy deletion was requested was this one made by MikeWazowski (talk · contribs), the edit summary of which states "Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G12). (TW)". If you follow the first of those two links, i.e. CSD G12, you'll see that MikeWazowski believes there to have been an "Unambiguous copyright infringement". Please bear in mind, that if true, such removal may have been right and proper per WP:COPYVIO. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Evelyn96.239.59.144 (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

London Undergound

The PMF saga continues. You commented on it at an earlier stage at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_Railways#London_Underground . The IP has now put in a defence at the talk page of London Underground itself. Your further input there would be appreciated if you have the time. -- Alarics (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Rochester railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rochester (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Redrose64 (talk) 12:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Elisabeth Sladen/GA1

I was just about to delete this, but I don't want to be accused of wheel-warring. Regardless of whether it's a test page, it has been created out of process. The reviewer is meant to create the page, and the reviewer is not allowed to be the same person as the nominator. This page was created by the nominator. A mistake has been made somewhere, but, in any case, this page should be deleted. J Milburn (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

OK... there doesn't seem to be anything at WP:GAN apart from "Do not start the review page yourself as this may lead other reviewers to believe that your nomination is already under review" and "you cannot review an article if you are the nominator or have made significant contributions to it prior to the review" - it doesn't say what to do if this does happen, so I've asked for advice at Misplaced Pages talk:Good article nominations#GA1 created improperly. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete it, explain to the creator what you've done? I don't really see why there needs to be a great amount of discussion about this, if I'm honest. I'm going to explain the situation to the nominator. J Milburn (talk) 21:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

This actually IS a test page, the GA nominator is not supposed to start the GA review page, as that will show him as reviewing the article on WP:GAN. Courcelles 22:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that G2 applies. G6 would be far better:

WP:CSD#G2: Test pages. A page created to test editing or other Misplaced Pages functions.

WP:CSD#G6: Technical deletions. Uncontroversial maintenance, ... This also includes pages unambiguously created in error

This page was clearly created in error, not as a test of Misplaced Pages functions. I have deleted it under G6, with additional reasoning given, see deletion log. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The nom can't start the GA page since it makes it appear that they are conducting their own review, which would obviously not be allowed. I presumed it was an accident, hence the G2, but I'll delete future instances as G6, since that's more accurate. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Eyemouth Railway Company

Could you take a look at Eyemouth branch and Eyemouth Railway Company. I move the former to the latter in line with other Historic Scottish Railway Companies, however the originator has reverted the REDIRECT now on the orginial article (include putting the errors I removed back in), and copied the same text into the other article. He has put a comment on my talk page, which I have responded to, however I would welcome your wisdom, that I am heading in the right direction, even though I still need to construct the RDT. --Stewart 13:00, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

It's a mess. Let's discuss at Talk:Eyemouth Railway Company. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

All I was trying to do was fill in the missing lines in Scotland. Now all the joy has been sucked out of that. Cheers Rsloch (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that was unfair. When people massively alter your articles without the courtesy of telling you have it rankles, but still I shouldn't have left the above. Rsloch (talk) 14:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Class 05

Hi! Just to let you know the Barclay 0-6-0s are NOT listed as Class 05 in either of Marsden's latest definitive works (2011, October and 2011, November). best, Sunil060902 (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't mean that they weren't so classified though: omission doesn't prove a negative. Perhaps Marsden has overlooked them, or has assumed that BR would never put two different designs into the same class. The fact that six British Rail Class D2/5 still existed when the list was published in July 1968, as opposed to just one British Rail Class D2/8 makes it hard to believe that BR would not have allocated a TOPS class to those that were numerically larger. All other types with locos still existing at that date were given a TOPS class.

I need to search out a contemporary copy of Railway Magazine. I do have one: it's a case of finding it. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, I have literally just emailed Mr. Marsden regarding this, and he has very kindly responded extremely rapidly. He says the following:

"The AB batch D2400-D2409 were not Class 05, this error was first seen in an enthusiasts book in the late 1960s but is incorrect, The 05 classification covers the Hunslet 0-6-0 locos in the D2550-D2618 series."

best, Sunil060902 (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Hello Redrose,

You were most helpful last night with regard to my question. I am sorry that I failed to pass an example over in time, but my typing was lost due to our conflicting editing, and by the time I re-did it you had probably retired to your bed.

This happened to me once before and each time I panicked and lost the lot. This time a bit appeared. (see Edit summary "Ooops, how did that get there?" by Vadmium)

I was instructed to "merge", but the Help page did not help me learn what I should do.

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The main information page is Help:Edit conflict. If you do get an edit conflict, you will see two edit windows; the upper one contains what the page has become since you started editing (but contains none of your edit), the lower one is the edit window that you have been typing into. The intention is that you compare one with the other, adjust the top one to match the bottom one, and then save. This can be difficult, especially since if you had chosen to edit one section, the top one will still contains the entire page whereas the bottom one will contain only the one section that you were editing. I normally find that it's usually easiest to:

• ignore the top one and go to the bottom one
• mark the text that you entered since you began that edit and copy that to clipboard
• use the "back" button on your browser to return to the page as it was before you began editing
• edit the same section again, paste in the text from your clipboard
• preview and save.

--Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

That is really clear and most helpful, especially the part about the two windows.

I shall copy this to my own page for ease of reference. All the best, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 19:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Quintinshill

Thanks. As the worst accident in the UK I'd really like to get this to GA or FA and some of these driveby uncited additions really bug me. NtheP (talk) 12:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

citation and date tags

Hi --

Thanks for correcting me on the appropriate use of the date/month/day/year parameters in the {{citation}} template. Do you know offhand when or where the use of "|month=|day=|year=" was deprecated in favor of "|date="? The {{citation}} documentation isn't clear on this point, and I'd like to update it with a link to the appropriate WP:MOS clause if I can. Thanks. —Tim Pierce (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The |day= parameter was valid but not deprecated for less than a year. It was added with this edit, but the template was altered to track its use with this edit, and the category used to track it was amended to Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters with this edit. The intention of having three separate parameters was so that dates in refs could be formatted according to user prefs, but I believe that it consumed too much resources; as a result of this the feature was removed, thus eliminating the need for the three components of a date to be separately provided. Where only month and year, or year alone, are known, the use of |month=|year= is still valid.

See Template talk:Citation/Archive 3#Deprecated fields and other threads in that archive from around September 2009. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Also please note that per MOS:DATEUNIFY, the YYYY-MM-DD format is permitted for access dates, but not for publication dates which should be in the same format as the rest of the article. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for the pointers. —Tim Pierce (talk) 19:58, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Aldwych tube station

Noticed an oddity on Aldwych tube station this evening. The infobox has a platforms item. When I first read it I infered that platform 2 was open from 1907 to 1917, and platform 1 from 1917 to 1994. Yes I know that is a wrong interpretation, however if I can make this mistake so can others.

The answer, I thought of going into the Infobox ( {{Infobox closed London station}}) and using the "years" and "events" parameters for expand the history section to cover the various significant events. However on check the documentation for the template, I noted that this infobox does not have "years" and "events" parameters.

Thoughts?? --Stewart 19:04, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I have long considered expanding {{Infobox closed London station}} but when doing so I would like to incorporate the main features of both {{Infobox London station}} and {{Infobox UK disused station}}. I'm out most of today though (Southampton Model Railway Exhib). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at Wood Lane (Metropolitan line) tube station. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

That is better. Do we really need start and close dates when we can put a chronology in? In Wood Lane (Metropolitan line) tube station the closing date is given twice in the infobox. --Stewart 18:26, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Probably not. I left them in to give a comparison. Obviously the infobox will need to retain |start=|end= until everything is converted. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for link to shortened footnotes

I didn't know about the shortened footnotes. I have had the problem of trying to cite the same book, but different pages, and wondering how to do this, and I had looked over the article Help:Footnotes until my eyeballs glazed over, so I added the section (from stuff I had found in an old Misplaced Pages paperback guide) but now that I saw the shortened footnotes section, maybe I'll figure out how to use those. Anyway, thanks.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

You can see them in action at NBR 224 and 420 Classes, which uses the {{sfn}} template for this purpose. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey, thanks, I like your sfn system better, and will try to use it from now on. By the way, your RR articles -- definitely cool. If I had more free time and infinite resources, I think I'd build a huge model RR setup somewhere in an abandoned building and charge admission.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

WP Stub Sorting in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Stub Sorting for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Clang!

Apologies for wasting your time over my Banbury/Bicester mixup. No need to reply. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

lipstick lesbian article

omg, thanks lol, I can't believe I missed that, I just saw the most recent edit and welcomed her, how embarassing -.-
--Mistress Selina Kyle 16:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Question about WikiProject template logic

Greetings, I would like to add some logic to Template:WikiProject United States that will populate a category if an article has more than 1 WPUS template. Is there a way to do that? Thanks in advance. --Kumioko (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is no way of forming such a test using Wiki markup, so there is no way of putting such coding in the template itself. You probably need to raise a bot request, asking that all pages in Category:WikiProject United States articles be checked. If there were few such pages it would be simple enough to export the pages and check individually: but we're talking about 748,472 pages here. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Have now spotted why you want this: it's to aid in edits like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep partially. The logic I am using to merge the templates works pretty well most of the time but it misses some and I didn't always have it so there are some out there from before I added it. I can scan through the articles it just takes a day and a half to do it so I was hoping to create a category that would tell me the problem. No problem though, thanks for the help. --Kumioko (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Multiple issues template usage suggestion

I have started a discussion about making the Multiple issues template the new cleanup template here. Since you have edited this template several times in the past I thought you might have some insight into this idea. --Kumioko (talk) 20:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I did? Several times? I can't find even one. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh sorry I thought I saw your name there somewhere. Too many things going on I guesss. Feel free to comment anyway. --Kumioko (talk) 20:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Betamax

I was wondering if i could ask do you know if all Doctor Who Betamax's were 60 minutes long? or just The Brain of Morbius Thanks Sfxprefects (talk) 13:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

IIRC, Betamax editions were the same length as the corresponding VHS release. They normally came out at the same time, and had matching catalogue numbers: i.e. when Revenge of the Cybermen was released in November 1983, the VHS version was BBC Video BBCV2003, and the Betamax was BBC Video BBCB2003. Most early VHSs were 90 mins - the only reason that the Brain of Morbius was so short was that the Laserdisc version came out at the same time, see here. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course, another possible reason was the existence of a one-hour edit of TBoM which had been broadcast in the UK on 4 December 1976. In the 1970s, it was common practice for the BBC to lead in to the new season, and fill in gaps mid-season, with one or two repeats of stories from the last season or two. These repeats were often, but not always, edited down to make a single- or two-episode compilation:

• The Dæmons (1 x 90-min) 28 Dec 1971, leading in to the ninth season (started 1 Jan 1972)
• The Sea Devils (1 x 90-min) 27 Dec 1972, leading in to the tenth season (started 30 Dec)
• Day of the Daleks (1 x 60-min) 3 Sep 1973
• The Green Death (1 x 90-min) 27 Dec 1973, in the middle of The Time Warrior
• Planet of the Spiders (1 x 105-min) 27 Dec 1974, leading in to the twelfth season (started 28 Dec)
• The Sontaran Experiment (1x50-min) 9 July 1975
• The Ark in Space (1x70-min) 20 August 1975, leading in to the 13th Season (started 30 August)
• Genesis of the Daleks (1x90-min) 27 December 1975, Christmas break (between The Android Invasion, finished 13 Dec, and The Brain of Morbius, started 3 Jan 1976)
• Planet of Evil (4 episodes unedited) 5-8 July 1976
• Pyramids of Mars (1x 65-min) 27 Nov 1976, Christmas break (between The Deadly Assassin, finished 20 Nov, and The Face of Evil, started 1 Jan 1977)
• The Brain of Morbius (1x 60-min) 4 Dec 1976, Christmas break (between The Deadly Assassin, finished 20 Nov, and The Face of Evil, started 1 Jan 1977)
• The Deadly Assassin (4 episodes: 1 & 2 unedited, 3 & 4 edited for content) 4-25 Aug 1977, leading in to the 15th season (started 3 Sep)
• The Robots of Death (2 x 45-min) 31 Dec 1977, 1 Jan 1978, Christmas break (between The Sun Makers, finished 17 Dec 1977, and Underworld, started 7 Jan 1978)

From 1978 on, repeats were unedited. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Hello again. Your post is is causing some bells to ring in my memory.

1. One of the drawbacks to betamax (and the reason that VHS eventually took the market) was that it has a limited amount of time that could be recorded on it. I think that it was 60 minutes in its original format. Though I should add that I think that that they did produce some that could record longer times before their demise.
2. I vaguely remember reading that the TBoM was edited down due to its perceived violent content (the Mary Whitehouse effect if you will) though I am not sure whether that was for the BBC repeat or for the tape release.
3. All of the early tape releases (in either format) had the opening and closing credits between episodes cut out. This would take out several minutes from a story and if any other trims were made (I can remember that, for some odd reason, the tape for The Pyramids of Mars cut out the "inches on one side and centimeters on the other" line by the 4th Dr as he is using his scarf to try and figure out one of the puzzles) you might lose 15 minutes or more from a story. Fans (who equal buyers of course) hated this and they eventually stopped. TBoM did receive a second VHS release with the cut content restored but some of the early VHS releases didn't and we had to wait for the DVD release to get the stories in their original length - The Revenge of the Cybermen and The Day of the Daleks being the last two if memory serves.

As I say this is all coming from memory (as well as referring to the situation in the US) so if any of it misses the mark I know that your research skills are so topnotch that you will be able to correct it. I just thought I would add it to the conversation if it might help. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

The earliest Beta tapes were certainly limited to 60 mins, just as the earliest VHS tapes were limited to 120 min. The development of thinner base material allowed longer tapes, which is how VHS progressed to 180 and 240 minutes. Betamax similarly got thinner tapes, and a 90-minute Betamax tape was on the market in 1978. Since the BBC didn't start producing prerecorded home video cassettes (DW or otherwise) until 1983, the 90-minute format would have been well established by then. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Did Beta ever have the ability to record at different speeds that VHS had? Depending on the VHS tape machine the might have different initials but it I remember SP - 2 hours - EP - 4 hours - SLP - 6 hours. I know that I recorded my 1st serials at SLP to get more shows on each tape - which was fine at the time but lead to them being somewhat faded 15 years later - Thanks goodness DVDs and VIDFIRE came along to give us high quality recordings. Again I'm vaguely remembering that this was another reason the Beta faded from the market. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 17:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Stranraer railway station

Hi, can you please review Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Transport in Scotland#Stranraer railway station for me. Am I on the right track? --Stewart 21:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Broadheath

The current narrative in the box gives a false impression of the true usage of an appreciable part of the line from the station to Baguley. Would you care to add a suitable note at a point of your choice in the Broadheath article to cover the position. Otherwise over-strict rules end up with giving, by default, false info to Misplaced Pages readers. RuthAS (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Redrose - sorry I left message on yours - not mine! I'm not used to that modus operandii, I'm afraid. Just a quick question - I'm not now sure why (Altrincham) appears in the title. The station name seems to have been plain "Broadheath" in Bradshaws. What do you think? Thanks RuthAS (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Redrose64,

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 Misplaced Pages 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 community HERE, 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 obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

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

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

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 03:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Job queue

You know a thing or two about this. We got over 1000 seconds lag on edits. Is the job queue stuck stuck stuck stuck? Ten Pound Hammer • 02:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Not entirely: slow, but not exceedingly so. The link in Help:Job queue shows a queue of between 3000 and 3000, mostly in the 2500-2700 range. At about 00:01 UTC today it was in the 6000-7000 range, so has definitely dropped in nine hours. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Unified login

I noticed your late post at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Unified login and added a reply. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

LCDR R class

Thank you for tidying the ref on LCDR R class. I don't know how to do it. Is there a tool for the purpose? Biscuittin (talk) 19:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

For the primary citation, using the {{cite book}} template, there are several tools but I don't want to recommend any because I never use them. I spend some of my time fixing up bad citations produced by external tools, but I don't know which tools those are: none of them leave a trail like "this citation was generated by xxxx".

Basically, I look at the documentation for {{cite book}}, copy a blank template from that and fill in the parameters. Some of those on the doc page are so obscure that they're best ignored, so here's a blank template containing those parameters which I do use:

{{cite book |last1= |first1= |last2= |first2= |last3= |first3= |editor1-last= |editor1-first= |editor2-last= |editor2-first= |title= |edition= |year= |origyear= |publisher= |location= |isbn= |ref=harv }}

Most are self-explanatory.

The |lastn=|firstn= are for the authors. You can have up to nine pairs.

Similarly, |editorn-last=|editorn-first= are for the editors, but with a maximum of four pairs.

|year= is for the copyright year; |origyear= is used for the year of first publication if that is different from the copyright year, and in such cases |edition= is used to show which edition was consulted.

|location= is the place where the publisher is based.

|ref=harv is necessary when short footnotes are produced from {{sfn}}, {{harvnb}} and related templates. If you're not using those, |ref=harv doesn't do anything visible but is harmless.

Regarding short footnotes: I know of no tools which generate those. But they're not difficult to put together - consider the following:

<ref>Smith 1994, p.25</ref> →

1. Smith 1994, p.25

This generates a shortened footnote which is entirely plain text

<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1994|p=25}}</ref> →

1. Smith 1994, p. 25

This uses {{harvnb}} to generate a shortened footnote which contains a link from Smith 1994 to the matching {{cite book}} (assuming that the latter has |ref=harv

{{sfn|Smith|1994|p=25}} →

1. Smith 1994, p. 25.

Visually this is identical to the last one, but you don't need to use <ref>...</ref> tags because those are built into {{sfn}}. It really comes into its own when you have multiple instances of the same ref - you don't need to worry about <ref name=something> - all that is worked out for you.

The bluelinks of the last two will both take you to the following:

• Smith, Martin (1994). Steam on the Underground. Ian Allan Publishing. ISBN 0711022828. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

--Redrose64 (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Template talk:WikiProject Canada

Argolin (talk) 04:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012

lana del rey born to die review

Just wanted to check why one review in the Independent is given preference over another, you have made a correction stating: review is already listed at position 4, with the true rating of 5/5

One rating is no more 'TRUE' than the other could you explain

Deneuve15 (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/album-lana-del-rey-born-to-die-interscopepolydor-6295631.html

If you examine edit , you'll see that the source for the review at position 11 is <ref name="independent">. This means that somewhere else in the article there is a full ref with the same name; and further up, at position 4, we find the following:

| rev4Score = {{Rating|5|5}}<ref name=independent/>

The review at position 11 therefore has the same source as the one at position 4. In the rendered page, this is shown as , clicking that takes you to the references section where the linekd URL is http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/album-lana-del-rey-born-to-die-interscope-6296383.html which awards five stars, not two. That is therefore not a valid source for your 2/5.

Also please note that per Template:Album ratings, reviews should be listed alphabetically. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Final request for Template:Canada

I think this is the last time I have to impose upon you for help with {{WikiProject Canada}}. I could not in good conscience go ahead with the name of the project as Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador/St. John's. It's not a subpage of Newfoundland. It's more a child of Canada not the province. I've just subscribed the project to Article Alerts copying the values from the Canadian music project. I figured that any complaints of the move to the new name, I'd bare. The final thing is the actual banner as displyed. I completely forgot as I was having a prolonged "todo" with the category project with regard to them deleting one of them on me! lol. The project name in the Canada banner points to the previous name. It should be Misplaced Pages:WikiProject St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. I don't know whether there are other parameters you must change to make it happen. Thanks for all your help. Argolin (talk) 08:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that this should do it. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks alot! Its really nice that I can ask for something and it gets done. You're spoilling me. All the best. Argolin (talk) 11:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh!: Bonds Beyond Time

You know the guy that's vandalizing? Well, you can report him at WP:ANI. Glad to help, 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012

Hi Red Rose,

Looking at your recent edits on Chippenham railway station, I think you made a slight mistake. I totally agree with that the electrification ref, there is not enough to support it but the AfA scheme there is. It shows where it's happening and when you click on the wheelchair sign it gives you full information on it. I have moved the not in citation given, but if you feel you would like it back please tell my why! Have a good day! --Chip123456 (talk) 09:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Redrose64 was correct to apply the templates. Your citations need to be as specific as possible - I have now linked to new pages - and really should be formatted with the appropriate {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}} template. --Bob Re-born (talk) 10:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Luddite comes forward

After at least trying out the new variant of the citation/bibliographic templates, I would like to find a template that will output in Modern Language Association (MLA) format rather than the present APA style. My main reservation is the placement of the date with the publication date, a |PublicationDate= parameter that does not seem to indicate date(s) of publication next to publisher, rather it places it in the author field. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC).

That I don't know. Have you tried asking at WT:CITET? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that seems to be the great bugaboo, as the APA guide seems to be the only style that is being accommodated, yet the MLA style is widely used in publishing as it is the standard for the Humanities. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC).

Help request

Jbrock327 would like your help. Jbrock327 (talk) 05:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

What sort of help are you looking for? Have you posted a message somewhere else and wish to draw my attention to that? --Redrose64 (talk) 09:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't get it

There's one thing I don't understand: how could the staff at Swindon works cut up the almost preserved class 22 by accident? 98.177.248.237 (talk) 23:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

They were probably given an instruction to cut up a different locomotive, but for some reason cut D6319 instead (withdrawn September 1971, the cut date was November 1972). Possible reasons could include: they were told to cut up a loco on a particular siding, but got the wrong siding; they were told to cut up the loco at one end of a particular siding, but got the wrong end; they were given the number of the loco to cut, but misread it. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:38, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Just to say thank you for your wikignoming - I often see you tidying up after me! Secretlondon (talk) 03:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Responding to edit requests

Hi, I noticed that you responded to several {{editsemiprotected}}'s. I'm not sure if you realized it, but after answering one, you're supposed to change it to {{editsemiprotected|answered=yes}} so that it doesn't show up in Category:Misplaced Pages semi-protected edit requests. Also, technically you're supposed to use {{ESp}} instead of {{EP}}, but I honestly doubt anyone cares about this distinction. Thank you. --NYKevin @967, i.e. 22:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I realised about the {{ESp}} just before I did this one. I have noticed that some other users leave |answered=no alone if there is a possibility that with further information, the request could become valid. In this case I felt that there was no such possibility. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Editors are able to mark something as unanswered if they come up with the needed information. Since an unanswered request will show up in the category, it is usual to mark it answered unless you think your response is insufficient or want someone to look it over. --NYKevin @980, i.e. 22:31, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Class 458

Thank you for supporting me in this RfC. Is there any way you can get more people to take part? It might look like inappropriate canvassing if I start approaching people. It may appear to be an esoteric question to do with a particular class of rolling stock and not of general interest, but the issue is actually much more fundamental, viz. whether an editor should be able to overturn properly sourced information which he or she happens not to like. Thanks -- Alarics (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: Template:Documentation

-- SLV100 (talk) 05:23, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

new message -- SLV100 (talk) 01:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Hull and Barnsley Railway

Hi there. I see you have restored the wikilink for Edward Watkin. I was about to do it this morning then realised it might not be the Edward Watkin of the article, but his nephew. Chevin (talk) 15:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, good point. I have now followed the link again and seen the hatnote. I rather think that Watkin (junior) is best dealt with on a biog article (maybe the same article as Watkin (senior)), not on the H&BR article. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Chippenham station, explanation to your edit summary.

Hi, the information on the reference you were looking for is near the bottom. Hope you can now find it. Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Many thanks for answering queries on my talk page! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Fenchurch St

Sorry for the page move, didn't realise there was a set of guidelines regarding railway station article titles. Thanks for reverting. --TBM10 (talk) 21:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

--Bob Re-born (talk) 22:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

GNR Class C1 (Klondyke)

Thanks for your addition to GNR Class C1 (Klondyke). I am thinking of renaming the article, see Talk:GNR Class C1 (Klondyke). What is your view on this? Biscuittin (talk) 22:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Location map help

hi, i saw some of your comments on the location map page and am assuming you have some knowledge about it. how do i make a name appear on mouseover to a marker:

you can see my code here http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Misconceptions2/sandbox, it has a part which says "link=Rayyis", but it does not say rayyis on mouse over to the marker which has the label=Exp. of Zaid ibn Haritha (Al-Is)--Misconceptions2 (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Multiple post. Have responded at User talk:Misconceptions2#Location maps. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:19, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking the time to track down the italictitle situation on The Five Doctors article. My guess was that it was something along those lines but I wouldn't have known where to begin to track it down. I appreciate your thoroughness. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 03:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

You've probably already seen it but just in case DonQuixote fixed the italics situation. It's always good to know that there are other editors that can fix things. Have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 15:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Locomotives

I think you've got an edit war brewing at LMS Hughes Crab. Thanks for your additions to LSWR K10 class and LSWR L11 class. I only added the Dendy Marshall reference so I can't help with page numbers for the others. I have also created LSWR C8 class and, if you could add further information to it, this would be most welcome. Biscuittin (talk) 10:43, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

He's claiming "Someone has undone the changes I made yesterday, which is somewhat annoying. I am an authority on the subject which the other contributor obviously isn't" which is somewhat annoying to me too: how do I know that he's "an authority on the subject"; and why am I "obviously" not? He's also dismissing my sources out of hand, which include the writing of Bob Essery, possibly the best living authority on LMS locos.

Anyway. Page numbers: I realise that you didn't add those refs - I'm hoping that the person who did will see these tags can add the pages. I only have one of these books myself - Brian Haresnape's "Drommond Locomotives" - and the stated fact (about black and white lining) I just can't find in there. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:23, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your clear revert edit summary. It helps understand what I've done wrong (Chippenham station)

--Chip123456 (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012 - BRI

you seem to be good friends with bob re born but I hope you can assist me with my problem with him. My edits on Temple Meads station, Bristol are I believe correct user bob re born keeps on reverting them. Please can you see which is correct and bring this dispute to an end! Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 20:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Such matters are best discussed on the article's talk page, Talk:Bristol Temple Meads railway station - see also WP:BRD. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Also see WP:3RR - the line is dangerously close at present. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. I didn't discuss the matter with bob a lot as he comes across quite aggressively. --Chip123456 (talk) 07:47, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Stalking

How did you come to watch my talk page? Have we met somewhere on wikipedia? Thanks for helping. You work trains and I work plants, so I was curiuos.512bits (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I have Preferences → Watchlist → Add pages I edit to my watchlist turned on, so here's how. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah. I'd forgotten that was you, but not the help you gave there. I'm using that sfn stuff in Botany improvement.512bits (talk) 23:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

See here. I did better on the trichomes (hairs) than I thought. 512bits (talk) 02:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

re: Misplaced Pages:Redirect

I know. Headbomb and I are both up against that rule right now. I have been trying, without success so far, to engage in a constructive discussion of the true intent of his/her change. It is possible, even likely, that this is a misunderstanding of intent. That should be fully sorted out on Talk before the content is re-added, however. Perhaps you can help mediate this discussion where I have been unsuccessful. Thanks. Rossami (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Wiki

Can't you post any website links on Misplaced Pages then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexpotter1996 (talk • contribs) 22:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

It depends what they are. See WP:LINKSTOAVOID, particularly item 10. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikicite/doc

Hi. I'm fine with the tweaks for {{wikicite/doc}}. But in a recent FA, I recall nikkimaria calling for consistency between sfn'd footnotes and the full cite, so .27.27 went in. You wouldn't know a way to do this without having to encode the apostrophes in the {{sfnRef}} would you? (fyi, the example is off Woodes Rogers.) Alarbus (talk) 01:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

User script listing cleanup project

I'm leaving this message for known script authors, recent contributors to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts, and those who've shown interest in user scripts.

This scripts listing page is in dire need of cleanup. To facilitate this, I've created a new draft listing at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts cleanup. You're invited to list scripts you know to be currently working and relevant. Eventually this draft page can replace the current scripts listing.

If you'd like to comment or collaborate on this proposal, see the discussion I started here: Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject User scripts#Scripts listing cleanup project. Thanks! Equazcion 04:31, 25 Mar 2012 (UTC)

Never written a user script in my life. Did manage to crash Netscape Navigator 4 once, by feeding it a chunk of javascript copied straight out of a textbook, not realising that it was intended for Internet Explorer 5. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:07, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit to Misplaced Pages talk:List of Wikipedians by number of edits

Hi, I've just noticed my edit from early on Saturday morning, which you reverted. It's a bit mystifying as I didn't intend to make any such edit. I think it must have been because I was viewing the wiki on my smart phone, and accidentally hit the "rollback" button when trying to click some other link. Silly thing is I didn't even notice it had happened until today. Thanks for catching it, anyway!  — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages School Project

Hello! I am in a college English course and working on a Misplaced Pages article for an assignment. I was wondering if you would have any suggestions for me to improve my page? Also, There is a box at the top of the page that says the article does not cite any sources, even though I have added citations. Is there a way I can fix this? Thanks so much!Aprose793 (talk) 01:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Midland trainspotting

Can't help with the 0-6-0s I'm afraid, and there's plenty more unidentified at Commons:Category:Midland Railway steam locomotives

Here's another I couldn't identify: File:Bournville Locomotive Depot, with Midland 4-4-0 - geograph.org.uk - 2123308.jpg It's easy to identify it - Casserley & Asher give it as Johnson Class 3, 40711-430762, 22/80 surviving in 1948, but I'm not sure what the class would have been called otherwise, cf. the "Class 483" 4-4-0s. Did they begin at 700? Andy Dingley (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

No, the locos which were 700-709 after 1907 were the 2606 Class of 1900-01 (Derby O/1869); 745 is of the 2781 Class (built 1902-04 in five orders), which after 1907 were 710-749. Prior to rebuilding with the G8As boiler, the 2606 Class had the GX boiler (barrel 10'6" long) whilst the 2781 Class had the G8 boiler (barrel 11'0" long). This difference may account for the difference in the wheel spacing: although both had a loco wheelbase of 23'2+1⁄2", the second axle was six inches further forward on the 2781 Class. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Present

Present for you on my user page.512bits (talk) 16:57, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Rail link

Dear Redrose 64,

I have considered your edits of Statford upon Avon to Honeybourne, is is not the case that there is a future possible link between the two lines are currently under investigation for funding? I will be pleased to hear your deliberations on the matter in question.

Thank you,

IkbenFrank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IkbenFrank (talk • contribs) 08:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not the place for speculation or original research. All claims must be backed up by reliable sources, per the policy on verifiability. If there is a firm plan to reopen the route, which has been proposed either by the various county councils, by Network Rail, or by a train operating company, and such project has been described in a reliable news source (such as The Railway Magazine or Modern Railways) it may then be mentioned along with suitable references. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Uttoxeter

Following on from conversation last year, see update at User talk:Lamberhurst#Uttoxeter station revisited. NtheP (talk) 12:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Stub categories

FYI: <https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?diff=486028176&oldid=485971510>. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Cite date and year

Looks like the issue with a year in the date field was fixed. See Help talk:Citation Style 1#date and year. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  13:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Oxford

Re this edit - under which part of WP:TPO did you remove my post? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

soz, that was a accidental mistake and you have my full apology. Twobells (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Titanic

Redrose, are you connected with the GWS at Didcot? The latest issue of Heritage Railway (12 Apr - 9 May) has an illustration of an Edmondson ticket printed in advance for use by passengers returning to the UK on Titanic for their onward train journeys to London. The article mentions various tickets surviving. Do you think that the GWS would be amenable to making scans of the tickets available via Commons. As far as I understand it, the tickets are ineligible for copyright. Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a member; I'll try to find somebody who is. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Chippenham to Wales

Hi,

Please note that the Wales is a main service but just has a limited service. (CPM). --Chip123456 (talk) 10:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

London Paddington/Supertramp

I have re-worded the sentance and added a citation though I can't help feeling that It does not need to be in the article. Long Robin 79 (talk) 10:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Car trim level articles

Hi, while I was looking at these new page creations you CSD'd (G4) this page, Trim level acronym, are you aware that hte user also created Car trim level acronym as well, which is an exact copy of the page you have tagged? I'll let you deal with this. Cheers! CaptainScreebo 20:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Both of them went to AFD, and one closed as speedy delete per WP:CSD#A10, whilst the other is still open. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Err this user is going bananas and could do with a block, methinks, the second article I linked to is a another clone of the Car Acronym article, so I just tagged it with a WP:CSD#A10. CaptainScreebo 20:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012 help

Hi, I need your help. I'm currently reviewing Notodden Airport, Tuven which is situated in Norway. A vast majority of the sources are in Norwegian but the article is in English. So, can I verify reliability from a language of which I don't speak. The nominator recommended that I should use google translate, which I'm not comfortable using because sometimes it has very poor translating skills! What can I do? HELP! Thanks -------Chip123456 (talk) 20:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Although I do have a small Norsk-Englisch dictionary, and have made some edits to Norwegian Misplaced Pages, I can't read the language without considerable help. I would suggest going to WP:RFT, or you could try directly asking one of the editors listed at Misplaced Pages:Translators available#Norwegian-to-English - I'm not going to recommend one, because I don't recall ever dealing with these people. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, so can they be accepted on the English Misplaced Pages? --Chip123456 (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The relevant policy is at WP:NONENG so it's not for me to judge whether these specific sources are acceptable or not. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

^ {{cite web |url=http://radiostationworld.com/locations/united_states_of_america/michigan/radio.asp?m=por |title=RadioStationWorld |year=2012 |accessdate=16 April 2012

Right thank you. Also what is wrong with the way the above reference has come out in the reference section? It doesn't look right! --Chip123456 (talk) 16:38, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The reference section of which article? I don't see it in Notodden Airport, Tuven. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, should've said. Sarnia by user TheKurgan, another article I'm reviewing. --Chip123456 (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The closing braces were missing on the {{cite web}} template.

More worrying is that the reference numbers don't correspond: the offending ref is numbered in the text (whose refs go up to but 78 in the References section (these go up to 84). Somehow 18 refs in the main text are not showing in References. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I thought that too, but didn't realise it was so many, thought my computer was just playing up! Will put it on the review page. Thanks Redrose, you are really helpful and a credit to Misplaced Pages, may sound a bit cheesy but it's true! --Chip123456 (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I have found several other instances where the two closing braces were missing, or one opening brace was missing; also one case where a single closing brace had been used instead of a double closing square bracket. I've fixed these up as well, and this appears to have fixed the numbering problem at the same time. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Right, well that is odd! Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Masturbation

Would the reference to Freud's views on masturbation be ok now since I have provided sources now?--RJR3333 (talk) 06:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Spearhead From Space

The data as to the broadcast schedule for Dr Who ALREADY exists on wikipedia. If you click on every story page which exists - and they all do - you will be shown the broadcast dates for every episode, including the 8 episodes that were repeated (An Unearthly Child (pt 1) & the complete Evil of the Daleks) prior to the Spearhead from Space repeat in 1971. Every broadcast date corresponds with a Saturday. It is not necessary to provide a citation when the information exists already on wikipedia. It is only necessary when there is no other supporting record and an external verification is needed. The citation that you demanded does prove that the repeat took place on Friday evenings and all the other Dr Who story pages combined verify that this was the first example of a non-Saturday broadcast. TVArchivistUK (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary: Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source, see WP:CIRCULAR. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your personal vendetta and your determination to escalate an edit war.

What vendetta? Please see WP:NPA and WP:V, also WP:NOR. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your personal vendetta and your determination to escalate an edit war. Please see your previous edits.

Which specific edits are you having trouble with? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your personal vendetta and your determination to escalate an edit war. Please see your previous edits.

Robots of Death

If you click on the wikilink to Pamela Salem or indeed to the page for the character 'Leela' you will see all the sources needed. Notes that are verified by wikipedia do not need further external sources.TVArchivistUK (talk) 02:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary: Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source, see WP:CIRCULAR. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Once again you have misunderstood and once again your personal vendetta and determination to prove that you are the ultimate authority on Dr Who has let you down. The pages I referred to all carried the SOURCED and VERIFIED data you had demanded. Thus by clicking the pages, the source was clear and verified. You are (again) making a mockery of the entire wikipedia project and indeed your personal vendetta's against editors is making it a miserable environment for everyone.

WoEML

(WoEML=West of England Main Line) If it were like that, it would mean that South West Trains services would have to reverse when they used to operate to Paignton, Plymouth and Penzance. It does not mention the trains reversing on any article. Pdiddyjr (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The thing is, they did reverse, since the track configuration in the Exeter area does not permit any other movement. See rail atlases such as

• Yonge, John (2005) . Jacobs, Gerald (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 3: Western (4th ed.). Bradford on Avon: Trackmaps. map 7A. ISBN 0-9549866-1-X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
• Baker, Stuart K. (2010) . Rail Atlas Great Britain & Ireland (12th ed.). Hersham: Oxford Publishing Co. p. 3, section A1, A2. ISBN 978-0-86093-632-9. 1010/C. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

What Misplaced Pages says, or doesn't say, about reversing is irrelevant, because Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The South West Trains Network map says that Exeter St Davids is not on a north-south arrangement like that. And it does not say that trains between Exmouth and Paignton reverse. And there would be no reversing, otherwise the principle fast services from London to Paignton would never have been operated from London Waterloo by South West Trains. Pdiddyjr (talk) 11:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Which South West Trains Network map? Can you provide a URL to that? If it is a topological map, there is no obligation for it to be geographically correct.

Here is an Ordnance Survey map centred on Exeter St Davids (indicated by the figure 1 on an orange disc). Railways are shown as thick solid black lines, and stations by magenta rectangles or circles. As is usual with O.S. maps, north is at the top and geographic relationships are maintained, so a line going straight up and down is a north-south line. The railway line going to the north (i.e. straight up) forks about two squares up from Exeter St Davids: the left-hand fork goes to Barnstaple; the right goes to Taunton and London Paddington (also Bristol and Birmingham). There is a second fork immediately south of Exeter St Davids: the gently-curving line going to the south is the line to Newton Abbot and Paignton (also Plymouth and Penzance); whilst the other line, which curves sharply east, is the line to Yeovil, Salisbury and Waterloo.

Many fast trains reverse en route; for example, CrossCountry have trains such as the 05:11 Manchester Piccadilly-Bournemouth which reverses at Reading, and the 06:01 Sheffield-Reading which reverses at Birmingham New Street. They even have services such as the 06:15 Leeds-Southampton Central which reverse at both Birmingham New Street and Reading. These, and several others, are shown on National Rail Table 51; yet this does not describe any reversal because it's not really relevant to a person planning a journey. The National Rail map of those routes shows the routes as running straight through both Reading and Birmingham New Street. The same map also implies that Birmingham-Bristol services calling at Gloucester do not reverse there; and that Birmingham-Nottingham services need not reverse at Derby. But if you actually travel on any of these routes, the reversal always happens. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. TVArchivistUK (talk) 16:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Have you reported me yet? --Redrose64 (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Redrose, I have posted a warning on the above users talk page for using the warning templates inappropriately, I can see that you are trying to help. It's a shame not all users think the same. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I don't want the above user getting worried after another user posted quite a worrying comment on their TP. I was wondering if you could just tell them not to get worried, I would but I think hearing from someone with more seniority on Misplaced Pages would be more comforting. Thank you. --Chip123456 (talk) 18:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm really unsure how to handle this. We have at least two editors who seem to think that Misplaced Pages is a good place to post interesting information, but don't wish to show their sources. This, to me, doesn't satisfy WP:V and possibly not WP:NOR; but when I try to explain this they seem to take this as some kind of mental deficiency on my part. One of these seems to have woken up after four months away just to express views about me. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, when I gave the above user advice he/she also said to me on this talk page history that I was abusive. I understand how hard it is for you now (which notably I didn't used to!) I think maybe if we express that their information is useful and is good to have on Misplaced Pages, we may be able to convince them to cite their edits. If they believe their edits are good I believe/hope they will put more effort into citing. Does this make sense?!--Chip123456 (talk) 19:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The edits were cited. In one case, the edit was not specifically cited on the page in question, but a wikilink was provided to the page where the reference was located. My problem is that instead of helping articles by perhaps searching for a reference yourself where you are not satisfied with what has been provided, instead you simply delete (as you've done in the past) or on this occasion, cite. You clearly follow all my edits and are tracking what I do, since everytime I make a contribution to Dr Who, within minutes, you've amended, deleted or cited it. If that isn't evidence of a vendetta, then I don't know what is. In the past you have made completely dishonest and misleading statements to counteract my correct edits. For example: "In the Classic Series stories, console room doors don't open directly to the exterior. Right from the start, they opened into a sort of passageway, and the console room doors are seen to have roundels on both sides." This was not true, as any cursory glance of some of the very earliest episodes proved quite easily. Yet you stated it as a reason for deleting my edits. When I see something on wikipedia that needs a reference, I go and look for one and add it if I can find it. If I can't, I leave well alone unless it's something that's blatant vandalism or simple ridiculous. Your pal MarnetteD edits in the same way that you do. On one occasion, they wrote (not on something I had contributed) that they had seen the relevant episode and the clip being referred to did not exist. It took me less than 30 seconds to source a reference for the page, which I added and thus proved that MarnetteD had no clue what they were saying. Yet, they had deleted the correct edit rather than helping source the correct edit. When I pointed out it would be more helpful to add rather than delete, I got a poisonous rant in return. With behaviour like that and from yourself, you wonder why folks are making warnings about your mental health. You found sources for the edits I had made and eventually added them. You could have done that from the beginning, but instead, you decided to start and escalate an edit war. Your train spotting buddy throwing in threats did nothing to help either. Please also do not edit correct references as you did on the Robots of Death page. The edits you made were incorrect and have now been reversed. The production notes that are included by the BBC research team on the DVDs is not hearsay. That they are sometimes confirmed verbally in the commentary only strengthens the argument and thus is noted separately. If a reference was ONLY mentioned in the commentary, then yes, it could be construed as hearsay and not a valid reference, but that is not what was claimed. I am done with this matter now. My goal was to enhance a page with an historical fact and a unique broadcast detail. I am sorry you and MarnetteD do not agree. You are not the owners of Dr Who in wikipedia and the very nature of the site will always and should always encourage editors to add production notes that may interest the wider audience. That they do not necessarily interest either of you is not relevant. Please do not cite wiki rules at me at this stage about what is acceptable and what isn't. They can be interpreted many ways and your interpretation is no more valid than mine. TVArchivistUK (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

You clearly follow all my edits and are tracking what I do, since everytime I make a contribution to Dr Who, within minutes, you've amended, deleted or cited it. Prove it: preferably in the investigation against me (which I haven't found yet). --Redrose64 (talk) 11:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

TVArchivistUK, there is a difference between following an editor from one article to another for harassment and "correcting related problems on multiple articles". The former is hateful but the latter is laudable. There are proper avenues for redress listed at that link. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Redrose, also note I was looking for the investigation of you and I did see some of the users contributions to see if I could find it, but there was nothing there to suggest that the user had reported you. --Chip123456 (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

New photo

I have a more recent photograph of Selling railway station which reflects the new shelters and paint scheme - http://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Selling_railway_station,_Kent_-_2012.jpg

As I'm new and not really sure of the norm (and as you have quite a few edits on that page) I thought it would be best to run it by you before including it (should I leave the old one on there as well if so?) Almostdecimal (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

It does look like a better image, so I've updated it. The best place for proposals like this is on the article's talk page - in this case Talk:Selling railway station. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I now see it is more important to have a more elaborate intro re usage of the term and its context rather than a move- thanks SatuSuro 22:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Default image size - rhayader and kidsgrove railway stations

could you pls indicate which part of WP:IMAGE controls the size of the images I have been inserting. The default you are using seems a bit small to me, also not very tidy. Thanks Flying Stag (talk) 11:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:IMAGE#Image syntax shows the normal syntax:

]

Notice the presence of |thumb| and the absence of anything setting an explicit size. In the next subsection, there are guidelines on forced image size, which has a further link to Image use policy on displayed image size. The main thing is that unless there is a good reason to force an image size, it's not normally desirable to do so. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:35, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reply. I speed read WP:IMAGE but somehow missed this. As an aged and permanent newbie I'm amazed I haven't been picked up on this before (you may like to go and review my contribs!) Flying Stag (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

3RR Warning.

Hey ! I just read your message. Just a thing to let you know I use the talk's page. AdamDeanHall doesn't. And I'm the only one who is punished ? ... 109.214.216.3 (talk) 23:40, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I've not punished you, I've served a warning. I could have gone straight for the block button, because you've made at least five reverts to each one of those articles in less than one hour (see WP:3RR). --Redrose64 (talk) 23:47, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

And AdamDeanHall ? Not a warning ? Cause he SO MUCH needs it. I have a warning, well, okay, obviously, this is those who are right you have a warning, I deal with it cause i'm an IP, but ADAMDEANHALL thinks he's god. PLEASE. 109.214.216.3 (talk) 00:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You shouldn't beg other users to warn him/her, only because you got a warning doesn't mean the other editor automatically gets one (See WP:WIN). Redrose isn't trying to punish you in anyway, just trying trying to give you some advice, as said, getting involved in the war can lead to a high percentage of editors being blocked, you are lucky because you didn't revert 3 times but 5. I would just forget about it now, and move on BUT when you are contributing on Misplaced Pages always keep WP:3RR in mind when editing. --Chip123456 (talk) 16:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Removing trailing spaces from headers

Uh... thank you for pointing it out! Nevertheless, I guess there is no need for a massive bot correction, right? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 08:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

The Twinkle is not so bright!

Hi, I'm having problems with Twinkle at the moment, also it is not letting me do edit summary. My twinkle is not showing and the same as my edit summary, any idea what could be wrong? Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely no idea - I never use Twinkle. However, I do know that MediaWiki 1.20 has just rolled out (at approx 18:30 UTC, which is 19:30 British time), which may cause unexpected effects. It's certainly made the diffs change solour & style. Try posting at WT:TW; if they can't help, try WP:VPT. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, will do. Thanks.--Chip123456 (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Its not just me, there are others experiencing the same issue. My edit summary is back now, taking it one step at a time. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

It's working! --Chip123456 (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Aluminium/Aluminum

Though Aluminium is the preferred spelling in chemistry related articles regardless of English variants, aluminum is still the preferred spelling for non-chemistry-related topics in a North American context. Please don't change the spelling in non-chemistry-related contexts (as you did at American Airlines Flight 11) unless the rest of the article is already composed in UK usage. See WP:ALUM. Acroterion (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry! It goes the other way too - I've seen people altering sulphur to sulfur for non-chemistry articles on a primarily British topic. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem - I've seen everything that can be done: one of my watchlisted items is Orange (colour), and it gets hit all the time by people who don't know that there is a UK spelling, and that it's perfectly fine to have it spelled/t that way without the wiki exploding. Cheers, Acroterion (talk) 20:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Keighley and Worth Valley Railway

Hi, I've been editing the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway article. Just been working on the track diagram template, and was wondering if you could give me a hand? Basically, I think it's too wide and I'm not sure how to reduce the width. I think that the best way is to spread the long annotations (about the final destinations of lines, etc) accross multiple lines but doing this manually seems horrendously untidy? I also think that there's a case for putting a couple of the annotations (for example the 'to Keighley goods yard' annotations) on the left, but I'm also unsure on this too. Thanks in advance MR7526 (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

|}

There's an awful lot of detail in {{Keighley and Worth Valley Railway}}; RDTs don't normally show so much. However, dealing with the specific problem of the width, I see two rows that are significantly wider than the others. For these, we may use the {{BSsplit}} construct: but bear in mind that this isn't satisfactory on all browsers, or at certain zoom levels. See right for a demonstration; I've put some of the medium-length rows in too, without altering them, by way of comparison. Since I've removed most of the rows (those with shorter text), this means that the route lines don't line up as seen here, but if you copy just those two lines into Template:Keighley and Worth Valley Railway, it should significantly reduce the width. Also please note that I've amended "Interchange" to "Exchange", to suit both the name and location as they existed when the ex-GNR Bradford-Keighley route was still open. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

That's great, thanks. I've tried to be detailed, and looking at other preserved railways (NYMR for example), it seems about the same level of detail. WRT Bradford Exchange, that seems sensible. MR7526 (talk) 18:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

for wrestling with my Jack Simmons references. I'll get the hang of it soon. Bmcln1 (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Sorry if, like me you don't like the TB templates! Chip123456 (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Chip, basically, we changed the name (by consensus) of WikiProject Thoroughbred racing to WikiProject Horse racing. Someone else did the easy stuff, I was trying to transclude the templates and get all the name changes around. When I did a redirect, the template didn't show on tagged articles, so I transcluded. At any rate, I think Rich Farmborough is fixing my foulups as we speak. Montanabw 23:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Getting sorted

I guess the TB project is getting sorted -- FYI, I wasn't undoing your changes, I had multiple windows open and got confused as to what I had or had not been working on. You know what you are doing, as long as it all works, I'm probably done futzing with all of this. Montanabw 02:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Are you still a member of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Record Labels?

If so, then you need to place this userbox, {{User WikiProject Record Labels}}, somewhere on your user page. If not, please remove your name from here or I will do it for you in a weeks time (May 14, 2012). Devin (talk) 05:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done - I thought that this was sufficient. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

New message

Hey dude, you have new message on. User_talk:Aris_riyanto#Interlanguage_links. Thanks Aris riyanto (talk) 01:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Policy

Hi, I need to find a policy to cite to another user but can't locate it. The one where it says you can't have lots of coloured writing in bus route lists. We've both combatted this before so I should know! Thanks, Rcsprinter (talk to me) 18:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I usually direct people to WP:COLOUR. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Of course, that's it! Btw, sorry for editing your page 200 times, edit button kept giving me an error message, didn't realise I was making edits as well. Rcsprinter (state) 19:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Cleanup bots

OK, so the last bit that seems to be needed is a cleanup of the cleanup bots. See here. I won't screw with this, but someone needs to. Montanabw 01:13, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

As stated at the top of User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates, "The bot works only if you give it your project's main template, not a redirect version.", so this edit was necessary. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I give up. Totally, I'll do content, let others deal with this syntax stuff. Montanabw 05:59, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Test, let me know if you get a you have new messages bar on my talk page please. The Helpful One 15:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Running self-test. --Redrose64a (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

RAF Raydon

Hello Redrose64, I am not sure that your 'fix' on Hardeligh Railway,Capel and Raydon Wood for RAF Raydon is technically correct. It is not something I know a lot about,but was curious to know which airfield was involved following my edits on the Hadleigh Line. RAF Raydon no longer exists so the word 'now' is not correct, but also it seemed to me in searching for the information that all the UK bases used by the USAF during the war still seemed to be called 'RAF xxxx'. I suspect that post-war any U.S. military establishment in the UK was subject to a contract and fee, whereas during the war the USAF were based at RAF stations on what might have been called an 'all hands to the pump' scenario. That might explain why the name would have been 'RAF Raydon' at the time. I'm not sure, but it worth mentioning.

I hope otherwise, that I have progressed from my early editing attempts. Best Wishes / Eastern Nat (talk) 11:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I wasn't too sure myself. The thing is, it's not usual to have text like

... handling supplies to a nearby United States Air Force base.

If it's not the same base, we'd put it in a separate "see also" section. If it is the same base, and the reference explicitly confirms that, we'd put something like this:

... handling supplies to the nearby United States Air Force base at RAF Raydon.

Since I believe that it is the same base, but I can't check it in the book concerned, the mention of RAF Raydon needs to be after the ref; but I wanted the text to flow properly. We could of course put something like this:

... handling supplies to a nearby United States Air Force base, later known as RAF Raydon.

One person who may know for sure is Mjroots (talk · contribs) - you've already encountered him in connection with LNER ships. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello again RedRose : Looking again at the pages for RAF Raydon and Raydon there's no doubt it is the correct airfield, and it does appear to have been re-named 'RAF Raydon' when taken over by the RAF, having actually been built by the US Engineer Corps. My '' was neutral on the question of when it got that name, but I think I would be happy to go along with your last suggestion 'later known as'. You will see I changed USAF to USAAF which was their title until 1947 apparently. Finally, sorry for sending same message about 6 times, I was getting a server warning which invited me to re-try and you know who God loves..... Best Wishes / Eastern Nat (talk) 09:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)--Eastern Nat (talk) 09:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

You weren't the only person to do that... I'm not sure of the exact cause, but I suspect that the Wiki software is trying to switch on the orange "You have new messages" banner to alert me, but is somehow failing to do so. This causes an error message to be sent to you, but this gives the impression that your whole post failed, rather than a tiny bit. My advice is to check your contributions to see if the most recent edit is the one that you just attempted: if it's there, you'll know that you actually succeeded, and don't need to go for the "try again" link. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

I've replied again on my TP. Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 08:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:RefToolbar 2.0

Please see: Misplaced Pages talk:RefToolbar 2.0#Cite button. The Cite button for RefToolbar 2.0 appears in every namespace but the article namespace. Could you take a look at the code? Thanks much! --Funandtrvl (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, this is really not my area. I use RefToolbar 1.0, where the cite button always appears (although its position varies, see Misplaced Pages talk:RefToolbar 1.0#Cite button). Although my only edit in MediaWiki space was to a .js file, the change that I made was written by somebody else (see the relevant talk page). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Misplaced Pages administrator hopefuls

Hi, re your edit to Template:User wikipedia/Administrator someday and your edit to Template:User wikipedia/Administrator maybe - the effect is that users with these userboxes are no longer placed in Category:Misplaced Pages administrator hopefuls, which is contrary to the advice on that cat page "The following userbox will add you to this category", and also at Misplaced Pages:List of administrator hopefuls: "To do so simply add either of these userboxes to your userspace". --Redrose64 (talk) 11:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Please see User_talk:Rick_Block#Misplaced Pages:List_of_administrator_hopefuls. - jc37 12:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox settlement

Hi Redrose64,

I saw you have made some changes in the template "Infobox settlement" and I suppose you can help me.

This template orders the location map in a row ("tr") and the coat of arms and the flag in another row ("tr"). For most of the countries that is OK, but you may know that Chile is a very long country and the infobox get very large, too large in my opinion. See for example Santiago (commune).

Hence, I have played with Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox and put the flag, the coat of arms and a little communal map in a column along with the large location map of Chile: you can take a look to Template:Infobox settlement/testcases.

My first question is: is it necessary? Do you know another way to get similar results?.

I think it is necessary and therefore I wanted to edit and publish a new template Template:Infobox settlement Chile, but it doesn't work as you can see in the red message in the first line. (the current version is only a copy of "Infobox settlement". the changes are to be merged from sandbox)

Second question: how can I bring my new template to work?.

--Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 14:45, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The best place to raise such matters is on the talk page for the template concerned - in this case Template talk:Infobox settlement. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I moved the question tothe talk page. Feel free to participate in the answer. --Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 15:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Fishguard and Goodwick

Hi Redrose64, Thanks for for sorting the rail symbol, out of interest what did I mess up by changing the infobox to UK from GB coz I cant see what it did, I'm asking this for future reference btw not to be picky as I appreciate all the help I can get on here, Cheers Jimmy3d0 (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

{{Infobox UK station}} is a redirect to {{Infobox GB station}}, technically they are equivalent, but there is no benefit to be gained by using one over the other, as you tried here. The problem was that with this edit you supplied a second |symbol= parameter: there already was one, albeit blank, just above |manager= (the parameter which you filled in with this edit). If a named parameter is given more than once, all except the last instance are ignored, even if the last one is blank.

When adding a parameter to an infobox, first see if the required parameter is already present and if so, amend that one. You only need to add the parameter if it is not already present. When doing this, note that infoboxes are normally laid out one parameter per line, to make it easy to spot if a parameter is present, so a new parameter goes on a separate line, not tacked on the end of an existing line.

When filling in the value of a parameter (whether new or an amendment), make sure that you use appropriate formats. For example, with this edit you used an inappropriate syntax for the |image_name= parameter - after you and others had a try, I fixed it here. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much Redrose64 that's all very informative! The reason I had done it that way is because I tend to copy formats from other pages when trying to replicate things like this so has copied the |symbol=rail from Fishguard Harbour railway station as that is how they have it on there? I here what your saying though about the last one bieng used if there are doubles, funnily enough I was just comparing the two when you fixed it and had been since the edit so I guess I would have found it in the end!!! and yes the same was the case when you fixed the other one you mention above!! us novices hey, must drive you mad lol ;-) thanks again Jimmy3d0 (talk) 21:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

COI

Schabas , possible COI

See User_talk:Schabas#Conflict_of_interest. As far as I know it has not been confimed that this editor (previously editing Michael Schabas) has any real conflict of interest. However a recent edit http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Crossrail&curid=241693&diff=492790031&oldid=492754087 promotes an organisation Michael Schabas was involed in http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_schabas/profile.html (a director).

If you can look at this in your administrative role that would be appreciated - it's not serious, but probably needs looking at. If too busy please let me know and I'll leave an open request on the relavent help desk.Oranjblud (talk) 01:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I remember the name as one who has had COI issues before - and I recall commenting in a related AFD. But COI isn't really my specialism, so it's probably best on a suitable noticeboard. Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Clacton-on-Sea Branch

Hi Redrose, Can I clarify branch line situation, the branch that diverges from main line at Colchester today has 3 termini at Colchester Town, Clacton and Walton, so I would suggest that my wording was OK. See plan on Sunshine Coast Line page. Best Wishes / --Eastern Nat (talk) 11:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

LMS Class five

Listen chum.

I have only inserted information that is taken directly from official records. By removing messages that warn people about the limitations of the information displayed you are deriving them of the possibility of understanding where they might draw incorrect conclusions.

I happen to have the most comprehensive data about the boiler history of this class of locomotives in existence - bar none. I don't say that lightly, and have supplied information to people who have written and are writing books on the subject. I thought it would be a good idea to pass on some details to the public domain which might interest people who are interested in the history of the class, or are making models which they would like to be historically correct. Unfortunately many existing publications contain substantial errors, and it is not always correct to rely on citing particular volumes because mistakes are often perpetuated ad nauseum.

Similarly with the Horwich Moguls, I have the most comprehensive collection of historical data on this class of locomotive, and have acted as a consultant to several people who have written on the subject including the late Arthur Cook and David Truman, both of whom I know well.

Unfortunately I don't have enough life left in me to set about publishing the data I have, and it seems appropriate to release some of it via Misplaced Pages - were it not for people like you who seem to think they know best (even though they obviously don't) and are determined to stifle any innovation, and deprive the public at large from ever knowing these things.

If you feel that a mistake has been made (and let's face it, we are all fallible) then it is up to you to prove it. You won't find a more informed source for the information I have chosen to place on the site. Okay, I got the length of time a particular locomotive was transferred to another region by about 25% in excess, but the response was somewhat excessive nit picking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.13.4.50 (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

No, you listen "chum". Taking information from official records fails our policies on original research and verifiability, because you are not using published sources. Making unsubstantiated statements in articles about the accuracy of published material fails the policy on neutrality.

I am not questioning the amount of data which you personally possess. But if you have supplied information to people who have written books on the subject, it is those books which should be used as references in the article. See WP:CITE for how to add references.

I don't "think that I know best". I try to make sure that material falls within our policies ad guidelines. Misplaced Pages is not a publisher of original thought.

If I feel that a mistake has been made, it is not "up to to prove it". The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Doctor Who DVD Releases, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

• Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Misplaced Pages articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.