Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:30, 10 September 2017

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- Unclassified 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

This page has archives. Sections older than 73 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Invasion of Time edits

The link you asked for

Sorry I'm bad at using wikipedia and messed up adding the cite, I asked Northern the other day about Bolton's Platform 2 and they replied to me https://twitter.com/northernrailorg/status/291975325221535745?uid=17412258&iid=am-34365388813588638626255904&nid=56+427

Reading

Seasons Greeting to you and yours

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.

To you

		Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

The Monk

I was sitting with a high steward, discussing Anglo-Saxon monks. The name we couldn't remember was Nennius. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 04:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC).

Enjoy!

		Happy Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

Happy New Year!

Dear Redrose64,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Template talk:WikiProject Biography

Hi Redrose64, quick message. On Template talk:WikiProject Biography, I removed the category not because I had been lazy and just not fixed the issue, I just hadn't realised that it might have been there because someone had posted a link to it in the talk. I had assumed it was just a one-time problem with the actual template itself at the top of the talk page, and so I could fix that by removing the category. I used hot cat, so didn't actually see what I had deleted. I should have checked changes before pressing to save my edit. I apologise, I just wanted to clear any misunderstanding. Thanks, SamWilson989 (talk)

Sailing from Holyhead?

Where can you sail to by Stena Line? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IkbenFrank (talk • contribs) 20:08, 27 April 2015

Season's Greetings

	Wishing you a Charlie Brown Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄
	Best wishes for your Christmas Is all you get from me 'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus Don't own no Christmas tree. But if wishes was health and money I'd fill your buck-skin poke Your doctor would go hungry An' you never would be broke." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914. Montanabw

VarunFEB2003 and template signatures.

WP:Help desk#Sign issue

Greater Anglia toc in sucession box

Thanks for reverting my dab of Greater Anglia to Greater Anglia (train operating company) in various succession boxes. If it causes breakage it may be something about the code of the box (beyond my understanding) as it appears on lists of links needing disambiguation & someone else might come along & do the same thing.— Rod 16:35, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

@Rodw: the correct dabfix was this edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:43, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Whitlingham railway station change

Hi Redrose, not sure I understand the reasoning here, passenger trains travel on the line between Whitlingham and Trowse, so surely the line is open to passengers. Only the station is closed, the line is open, or am I missing something (quite possible!)...GrahamHardy (talk) 19:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Which trains? The latest edition of

• Baker, Stuart K. (2015) . Rail Atlas of Great Britain and Ireland (14th ed.). Addlestone: Oxford Publishing Co. p. 31, section A1. ISBN 978-0-86093-669-5.

shows the Wensum Curve in red, which denotes freight-only, i.e. not open for passenger trains. Therefore, passenger trains that run through both Whitlingham and Trowse will need to reverse at Norwich (Thorpe). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:43, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

I think you may be right! Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 21:47, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Birmingham Moor Street Railway station

Hello, No-where on this page does it mention the fact that a public meeting was called on site to discuss the plans of the London & Edinburgh Trust (supported by Birmingham City Councii to knock it down and the subsequent formation of the Moor Street Station Historical Society when I as chairman succeeded in obtaining a Grade II Listed status to prevent it. This group cleaned, tidied & repaired the station - all of which is well documented in the pages of the Birmingham Post & Mail. I also have reams of documentary evidence & photos. Chiltern Railway will be celebrating 30yrs of its Listing next July. Sincerely Bernard Juby — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anketil (talk • contribs) 09:36, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

@Anketil: Why are you bringing this up here, instead of at the article's talk page (Talk:Birmingham Moor Street railway station)? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:04, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

New one 6 July 2017

Hello R. Green Day showed up in the category. I tried a null edit but it did not work. I hope that you are having a pleasant summer. MarnetteD|Talk 01:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

It was because of the {{pp-move-indef}}. Basically, BU Rob13 (talk · contribs) downgraded the move protection from indef sysop to 1 year of 30/500, but probably should not have done that, so I have restored it to its previous level and duration. See prot log. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that was a mistake while I was applying ECP. I didn't notice that the move protection was sysop. Thanks for correcting. ~ Rob₁₃ 14:02, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks R. I notice that the article is still in the category. Does the template need changing? There are so many details with some of the protections that I am sure they are tricky to deal with. That is why I always appreciate your expertise and help. MarnetteD|Talk 18:08, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, WP:NULLEDIT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Excellent. MarnetteD|Talk 22:29, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Infocom techno solution ? why deleted page

Can any one suggest me why this page is deleted ??

i want perfect reason — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nashikinfo (talk • contribs) 09:48, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@Nashikinfo: I have no idea what you are talking about. Your post here was your very first Misplaced Pages edit; none of your edits has ever been deleted. When you reply here, make sure that you include a link to the page in question. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Art on the Underground revisions

With respect, I spent time editing the Art on the Underground page ensuring it was up to date and accurately represented the work that they do. I also corrected errors on the London Underground page (for example Art on the Underground was founded in 2000, not 1986.) I also added references to artworks within stations (Piccadilly Circus, Charing Cross and TCR).

Art and Architecture is a major part of the Underground - and I would strongly disagree that references to these works should not be included within articles. Precedent of artwork in rapid transit articles is well established - for example 96th Street (Second Avenue Subway)

I would also disagree that I am "plugging (my) art exhibition" - I have no connection to Art on the Underground, London Underground, TFL or any other transportation body. I am merely a curious individual with an interest in the topic - and a desire to improve the wikipedia articles thereof.

I would be delighted to work with you on improvements to these articles.

Yours truly, 86.13.122.76 (talk) 09:00, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

We have recently had a number of edits by the exhibition organisers, and by the creators of those artworks, who are clearly trying to promote themselves in breach of WP:COI. If you feel that the artworks should be mentioned, the best thing to do is to raise a thread at the talk page for the relevant article. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

That's perfectly understandable. Would you be averse to a correction on London Underground fixing the founding year, before I raise a thread at the talk page for the artworks themselves? I will also post on Piccadilly Circus and Art on the Underground talk pages proposing changes to these articles.

86.13.122.76 (talk) 10:34, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Line height

Sorry to bother you again Redrose, but do you know of a template that adds <div style="line-height: ">? Thanks.--Nevé–selbert 09:51, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

No. Where would you be using this, how would it be of benefit? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:28, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I would like to use such a template in an infobox like so (using traditional markup):

Instead of this (without markup at all):

The height of the gap between "Serving with" and the names should be reduced, in the same way {{Longitem}} manages to do in most cases.--Nevé–selbert 17:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

There's hardly any difference in my browser (Opera 36) - other browsers may vary. If there is a benefit to doing this, this seems to me as if amending Template:Infobox officeholder/office would be the best route, but only if it's agreed first at Template talk:Infobox officeholder. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:23, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Question

RR64 - do you know off-hand if users are required to have a TP for notices, communication, etc. or can they remain an IP doing stuff on WP (not all good but with good intentions) without a way to contact them? 15:53, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Nevermind, found an answer that works. 😉 20:32, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

We do not have a requirement that only logged-in users may communicate with other users, nor that users may only communicate with logged-in users. Therefore, user talk pages for IP addresses may be created and edited by anyone (subject to normal protection rules). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Apology

Hi RedRose, I wanted to again apologise for the accusation yesterday,
I know I apologised yesterday but that was half-arsed so I wanted to actually apologise this time,
I should've actually looked properly at the discussion(s) before accusing you, The comment was in bad faith and I want to state here and now that that comment was a complete error on my part and as I said I should've checked thoroughly first before making such a stupid comment so again I wanted to sincerely apologise for making that statement,
I know we've butted heads in the past but we only live once and life's too short for petty wars & arguements but I again apologise for the rather stupid comment,
Hope you have a great tomorrow and Happy editing :), –Davey2010 20:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome :), Happy editing. –Davey2010 23:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Gallery

Hello again Redrose. If you can help out with this, it would be very much appreciated indeed. I having a hard time trying to separate a thumbnail and said template:

Example
Foo Foo Foo

I would like the gallery to appear below the thumbnail and not side-by-side. Do you know of a way to work round this? Thanks.--Nevé–selbert 15:20, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Two ways, which are actually the same although implemented differently. (i) add {{clear}} before the {{gallery}}; (ii) inside the {{gallery}}, add |style=clear: both;. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:59, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Neither works for me but it doesn't matter. Have changed my mind over where to place the gallery.--Nevé–selbert 20:55, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Example
Foo Foo Foo

This works for me; it should work in all modern (post-1996) browsers. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:45, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Highland Main Line

Follow-up to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Druimuachdar Summit --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm tired and off to bed, but AFAIK the IP is only a few hours outside of violating 3RR and called me "a Nigel" (is that a reference to Mr Farage?) so I would say any uninvolved admin is fair game to block. Hopefully though, the latest edit is enough to get consensus and prevent that. Ritchie333 22:42, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Oxford 53

I note you haven't created a page for the next Oxford meetup yet. Is one happening in August? Thryduulf (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry,  Done --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

GWR First Class

You say that you have never seen leather seating on a 166, or at seat service.

Here is why you are wrong.

First Class seating on a GWR 166: https://www.flickr.com/photos/55223176@N03/28594827641/in/photolist-KyPY2F-WvUGyv-KyPYBP-VVC8aY-VVC9jm-VeEve7-JKcidA-TAg1Rn-yadmoe-z76gSM

At Seat Service: https://www.gwr.com/plan-journey/train-times look at timetable E10. Operated by a Class 166.

If you want to edit stuff, I don't mind that, but removing stuff because "you've never heard of it" doesn't mean its not true.

Thank you.91.125.63.38 (talk) 17:38, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Doesn't really look like leather  :) more like good old English vinyl... — fortunavelut luna 17:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean this edit, or this one?

In the first case, I said "please find me *one* train - any one - that does not have standard class. If you can, then this may be qiualified; if not, the text is redundant". I have never yet come across a train that had no standard class (or second class, as it was formerly known), other than boat trains, excursions and other specials. So it is simply not necessary to state that standard class is provided on "local services across the West, Bristol and London as well as its long distance HST services". The implication is that there is no standard class on South Wales services, which is easily disprovable. Why not simply state that it's on all services?

In the second case, I said "I've never seen either leather seats or at-seat service on a 166". I travel in Class 166 trains quite frequently - those seats are not leather (tables I will grant you, except that some seem to be mysteriously missing). Nor is there a "customer host" (unless you count the ticket collector) providing "at seat service" (unless that means a ticket inspection). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

It clearly says in the GWR timetable that an at seat service is provided on Gatwick airport services. 91.125.63.38 (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Class 166 is used on other routes besides the Gatwick airport services. Paddingon - Oxford (calling at Reading only) for example. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

RE: Editors abusing the system

I was directly quoting the page for Sarah Wiedenheft which was put for draft:

This user in particular, and I'm sure there are others, has attempted (and succeeded) this with many different actors on numerous occasions (not excluding the one above.) I've gotten several people complaining about it. Most of the actors put up for discussion have proper sourcing. And if they don't, it's one thing to remove a credit because of that. But to put an actors' page up for draft/deletion due to one's opinion of fame/notability? I don't agree with that. Swiedenx3 (talk) 03:26, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

@Swiedenx3: I am not a "go to" for disputes between two people who I don't recall encountering previously, nor for disputes about a page which I have never touched nor have any interest in. Your comment begins "I was directly quoting" which implies that you are continuing a discussion that was started elsewhere, so really you should have put your comment on that discussion, not here, in order to prevent fragmentation (see WP:MULTI).

The attached image seems to concern a deletion discussion at WP:AFD, probably WP:Articles for deletion/Sarah Wiedenheft, but that is now closed, so you have three avenues: (i) start a thread at the talk page for the draft, Draft talk:Sarah Wiedenheft; (ii) the talk page for the closing admin, User talk:Ks0stm; (iii) you could follow the WP:DRV process. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

@Redrose64: I can understand that however you asked about it in a different discussion, I'm new to this platform it's wacky and replying is awkward, I honestly am still unsure if I understand it so I apologize.

I actually just now figured it out thanks to your reply though. Thank you for the information regardless.

Swiedenx3 (talk) 08:58, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

A question for my talk page watchers

First consider this pair of edits, which comprise one post. Now, read this post (the whole post, not the altered words) carefully, and consider it in relation to the first. Can anybody explain the logic here? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:27, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I saw that yesterday I think, the only rational that comes to mind is WP:BATTLEGROUND. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:35, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Revert Clarification

Category discussion

Wanted to thank you, a bit belatedly, for bringing this discussion to my attention!  Paine Ellsworth    21:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edit on Govia Thameslink Railway

Hello, I notice you reverted my edit on the GTR page. I was just changing the infobox from "company" to "rail company". The other changes were side effects of using the visual editor. Do you agree with the change I was trying to make? Thanks JaJaWa (talk) 03:05, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I didn't notice the change in infobox type, what I saw was it all mashed up into the start of the source text, all on the same line as (and preceding, contrary to MOS:LEAD and WP:HNP) the hatnote. I stay well away from VE: it causes too many problems. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:01, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Royal family

Hi Redrose. Would you mind lending a hand in fixing the whitespace issue at Royal family#Current royal families? I have tried using {{stack}} but to no avail.--Nevé–selbert 18:34, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

@Neve-selbert: At present, it's forced below the bottom edge of this image because the {{col-begin}} template internally uses the CSS declaration width:100%;. The template doesn't provide the means to suppress that, but it may be overridden - one thing that works in some browsers (like Opera) is to add either |width=auto or |width=inherit to the template (for the differences between these, see CSS 2.1 Specification section 10.2 Content width: the 'width' property); this will bring the columnnar lists directly below the section heading but might also crush it sideways.

I generally avoid {{col-begin}}/{{col-break}}/{{col-end}} because the need to set artificial divisions between columns (i.e. the {{col-break}} template) can cause accessibility issues. You could alter the article to use {{div col}}/{{div col end}}, but the top edge of the columnar lists would be no higher than the top edge of the aforementioned image. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Showing me how it's done

Thanks for covering for me on the breakdancing RfC. I've never renewed an RfC before and I appreciate your taking the time to clean up my mess! Ibadibam (talk) 16:37, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ibadibam: It's because when preparing pages like Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Media, the arts, and architecture, Legobot (talk · contribs) copies everything from the {{rfc}} template (exclusive) to the next timestamp (inclusive), with this result, which since my edit has been improved. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:08, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Mr Alvini

Please block Mr Alvini (talk · contribs). He is vandalizing nonstop. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 21:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Have they been reported at WP:AIV? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:57, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes they have, and nothing is being done. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 21:58, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Why should I not block Instantmatter49 (talk · contribs) instead? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:00, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Because Instantmatter49 (talk · contribs) is not vandalizing. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 22:01, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

It's a matter of opinion. Both seem to be in breach of WP:3RR many times over, maybe I'll block them both. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Reference to your recent guidance on Misplaced Pages template print-outs and matters subsequent to it.

I do not know how long it will take Misplaced Pages to correct the recent print-outs that show a full white line across the template between every single station, which was the reason why I first raised this matter, as it is of very recent in time. I thought that I would try to print out the Template : Disused Exeter to Plymouth Line stations RDT today, but the same "dotted line" appearance on the actual railway line is still there as before.

I am rather confused as one person told me to address the matter to Village Pump (Technical) then I was notified that was not correct and to use a different one. From what I can see, someone has kindly brought this matter to the correct part of Misplaced Pages technical in order that matters are corrected. Have you any idea how long it will be before matters are back to normal.

I did make a formal apology on my talk page entry on the matter.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 17:56, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The Village Pump (Technical) thread being Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Problem suddenly found when printing out RDT line templates; it has a link to MediaWiki talk:Common.css#Protected edit request on 8 August 2017 and if my suspicion is correct, that is where a note will be left when the fix is made. At present, they seem to be discussing why an !important annotation was used. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposal for a Category:Misplaced Pages stub templates by topic

Hi Redrose64. I have just proposed a new category for organizing stub templates, what do you say? Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 13:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

REM rail box

Hi,

The Rambling Man deleted the whole convo on his talk page, so I thought we could continue here. Just wanted to know how you planned to build and implement the rail box for the REM? Thanks! Mtlfiredude (talk) 01:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

It seems that they did, along with an indiscriminate bunch of other threads. I suspect that the recent behaviour of some people on that page may have had something to do with it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, he "cleaned up the trash" it seems... So about the rail box, if you manage to build the template, I can then implement it for each REM station. Sounds good? Mtlfiredude (talk) 14:56, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Date sequence

I'm puzzled by your edit comment. Are you suggesting that the date sequence in citations should be different from that in the article text, or that there is some guidance endorsing such difference? Clearly we want consistency between citations, and there are gnomes using bot or AWB assists to achieve that. All that {{use mdy dates}} and {{use dmy dates}} do is avoid bunfights over such trivia by guiding these gnomes to the established consensus order. Do we perhaps need a way to indicate one order for the body and another for the citations? LeadSongDog come howl! 15:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The section is about citation styles, the subsection is about what is considered helpful when dealing with existing citations. Adding {{use dmy dates}} and similar are nothing to do with improving citations, they concern the overall style of the article as a whole. It has previously been established (see MOS:DATEUNIFY) that the date format in refs may be different from that in the article as a whole; I am not saying that it must be different and I fail to see how my edit summary can be taken that way. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:10, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

I get that, but do we not then need an equivalent, something like {{use mdy dates|cites}}, to unify the citation publication date format when they differ from the body text date formats? LeadSongDog come howl! 17:34, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

I just raised this for comment. Cheers, LeadSongDog come howl! 19:57, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

British Somaliland

There is currently a dispute on which are the successor states to the former entity. Because you have edited country templates I decided to contact you.92.13.137.81 (talk) 20:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Which country templates? Please state which ones; I don't recall ever editing anything to do with British Somaliland. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:32, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

You edited this. I figured you know more than me about acceptable usage of parameters on that template. 92.13.137.81 (talk) 22:57, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

All I ever did to that template was remove a declaration from a style= attribute that had been causing accessibility issues. It does not make me an expert in that template, even less an expert on British Somaliland. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:34, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Can you fix something?

Hello, Redrose64 – I just left a long comment at Talk:Waldensians#Sentence needs clarifying, and right after I saved it, I saw that the font of my comment was small. I looked at the previous section and saw a comment added but not signed. It looked like the poster deleted part of the date-time stamp of the comment before his/hers, but I wasn't sure how to fix it. Can you fix this? Thanks in advance,  – Corinne (talk) 16:14, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

This edit will have fixed it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:30, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!  – Corinne (talk) 20:26, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

London Victoria station

Re the Rose reference, would it help to mark is as |page=not numbered or similar? Mjroots (talk) 09:28, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

It's a single sheet of B1 paper, printed on one side. I don't want to imply that there is more than one page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:59, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Sir Terence English

I would appreciate your comments on this article, also the History of Medicine Society page. --Whispyhistory (talk) 14:34, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Investment

Hey there! I just re-launched the WikiProject Investment.

The site has been fully revamped and updated and I would like to invite you the project.

Feel free to check out the project and ping me if you have any questions.

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Misplaced Pages that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Misplaced Pages articles. Thanks!

Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 11:00, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@WikiEditCrunch: I know you did; that is why I made this edit and this one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:26, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh I did not see that.Thanks! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 11:27, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Rowspan problem

Hi Redrose. Would you mind helping me out with a particular problem concerning table formatting? I am trying to span two cells containing dates so that they can contain two cells adjacent to it like so:

Here the date cells (highlighted red) contain both George V and Edward VIII on the far right (highlighted yellow). But when I use the immediate above and below cells, it looks like this:

Here the date cells (highlighted lime) are still rowspan-ed, yet the George V cell (highlighted aqua) does not correspond in the same way, with Edward VIII filling the entire space. I have been trying to solve this problem for a while now but every time I end up seriously disarranging the table. I am not sure what else I can do.--Nevé–selbert 18:00, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

It's a browser issue; it displays fine in Opera 36. But at Template:Rail line three to two (this version) I did it by making sure that one column (the second one) had no rowspans, and hiding the last five of the six top borders, also the first five of the six bottom borders in that column. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm an intermediate at best when it comes to table formatting. Could you try that technique out on the table above? Thanks.--Nevé–selbert 13:44, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry Redrose64, but would you mind lending a hand? I need some help with this.--Nevé–selbert 13:28, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Reminder

Hey,

Are you still able to help for the REM rail box? I haven't heard back from you. Thanks Mtlfiredude (talk) 01:52, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Sources

I do know of some sources, one for the LMS Fowler Class 3F, although it's a really messed up source . Also there are some sources for the top speed of the LB&SCR E2 class although they are debatable, since some of them say that their maximum speed is 30-40 mph, while others say that their maximum speed is 40-50 mph. So it's basically debating between three possible top speeds for the locomotive. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 04:12, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Messed-up sources cannot be considered reliable sources. We need to satisfy the policy on verifiability.

The thing is though, stating a maximum speed for a steam loco isn't really valid. Diesel and electric locomotives (and multiple units) have a sign in the cab "Max speed 95 mph" or similar, this is the speed above which it would be unsafe for the loco to run; if we can source that, we can use it. However, for a steam loco, there is no such sign, and the maximum safe speed is usually greater than the maximum capable speed. The maximum capable speed is affected by many factors like quality of coal, physical state of the fireman, time in service (steam locos deteriorate during the day, hence the need for daily shed attention) and several other factors. Stating a "maximum" speed for a steam loco is misleading; it's like with the LNER Class A4 - we know that Mallard did top 125 mph on one occasion, this does not mean that it would always have been capable of doing that. So is 125 mph the maximum speed for the A4 class? No. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 05:58, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Cleanup on aisle three

Hello R. A few items have shown up in our old friend Category:Misplaced Pages pages with incorrect protection templates. I cannot edit the template redirects and I'm not sure why Trump's talk page is in the cat. Thanks ahead of time for checking on these. MarnetteD|Talk 19:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Why can't you edit Template:DELETE? It's not protected. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Of the others, the necessary edits were these. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

D'oh. After noting that first one was fully protected I just assumed the second one was as well. Thanks for the fixes. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 21:51, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Artúr Görgei

Hello, Redrose64 – I'm in the middle of copy-editing Artúr Görgei (but am actually putting writing by a non-native speaker of English into English), but am taking a break now for a couple of hours. I don't know much about tables, but it seems to me that the cells in the table about two-thirds of the way through the article are too tall. There seems to be a lot of unnecessary space below the text in the cells. If you agree, is there any way you could reduce the height of the cells?  – Corinne (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

@Corinne: This is one of those things which will vary according to many factors, such as screen width, browser type, fonts available and their sizes. But the main factor will be the table content itself: each row will be as tall as the tallest cell in that row, so if one of the cells in a row contains significantly more information than the others, that one will dictate the height and so the others will have unavoidable blank space. The chief culprit seems to be the "Notes" column, which in some cases seems rather verbose. The last row is particularly bad in that regard.

Something which you have not picked up on is the misuse of <ins>...</ins> tags. These have a semantic meaning: the ins element "represents an addition to the document", and that is not how it is being used here - it seems to be used purely stylistically, perhaps to underline text, for which other methods are much more appropriate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Redrose64. After I left this comment and finished copy-editing the article, I realized that it was probably the copious notes in the last column that was causing the cell heights to be so tall. Either the notes need to be shortened or the column width for that column needs to be made wider. I've left comments at User talk:Norden1990#Artúr Görgei copy-edit and, to get the ideas of a military history editor on this and other issues , at User talk:AustralianRupert#Artúr Görgei. I really do appreciate your comments. Now, I'll leave it up to Norden1990, AustralianRupert, and the other editor who had expanded the article.  – Corinne (talk) 17:12, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

(Sorry, Redrose64 – I left this comment before realizing you had already left a comment on AustralianRupert's talk page.)  – Corinne (talk) 17:22, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

South Gloucestershire#Transport - Railway stations

Thank you for your swift and decisive action. SMeeds (talk) 08:52, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Birmingham and Bristol Railway

Could I ask for your advice about what to do in this article? Birmingham and Bristol Railway

In my view there was no such railway (except in the sense that there is and was a railway between Birmingham and Bristol). I thought that the article ought to be deleted and I put the necessary marker on the page, and explained my reasons briefly on the talk page. I also left a message on the talk page of the originator of the article.

That person has simply deleted the flag inviting comments about the deletion without any explanation.

It doesn't matter whether my view about the deletion is correct or not; my concern is only that the Wiki procedure had been disregarded. Of course I could just revert the other person's deletion, but that would just descend into an edit war, which I don't want to do.

With your greater experience of process issues than mine, I wondered if you could advise me what the way forward might be? Any guidance will be gratefully received. Afterbrunel (talk) 19:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) It did exist, but only as a legal fiction for a brief period during the collapse of the railway bubble, as the holding company through which the lines between Bristol and Birmingham were subsumed into the Midland Railway. (Think an early-Victorian version of Directly Operated Railways, albeit over a much shorter timescale.) I very much doubt there's enough to say about it to sustain an entire article. ‑ Iridescent 20:09, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

As I made clear, I was hoping for some advice on the process, irrespective of whether my opinion is right or wrong.

Fwiw I don't believe any Company of this name was ever formed, and in any case the generic name for any informal association was Bristol and Brum, not Brum and Bristol.

In addition there may or may not be enough in it (even if it existed, which I don't believe), but that isn't the issue. RedRose, can you help please? Afterbrunel (talk) 15:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Iridescent mentioned "the collapse of the railway bubble" for which the most relevant work is probably

• Lewin, Henry Grote (1968) . The Railway Mania and its Aftermath. Newton Abbot: David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-4262-2. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

in the Companies' Index of which we find the entry

Birmingham & Bristol 76, 83, 97, 266

Note says This was not an incorporated company (see page 83 and note 9).

Note says This was not strictly an amalgamation since the companies remained independent except that they were worked as one under a common board of management (see page 76). There was no Birmingham & Bristol Company.

Page 76 says the two Companies did consult together, and arranged that their traffic should be worked under one management as from January 1st, 1845, pending an amalgamation also Mr John Ellis, Deputy Chairman of the Midland Railway ... offered the two Companies a perpetual least ... with an option to purchase, on behalf of his Company. This offer was accepted by the provisional Birmingham & Bristol directors and confirmed by his own Board, so that, as from May 7th, the Midland took possession, pending the introduction of a confirmatory Bill in Parliament. It ... was duly passed in 1846.

Page 83 is a table, one row of which is:

Effective From	Company	Form	Date Sanctioned	Company
Jan. 1845	Birmingham & Gloucester Bristol & Gloucester	Amalg. as	1846	Birmingham & Bristol

So, this is something along the lines of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway 54 years later. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:58, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you for the numbered lists tutorial.

Whispering 21:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

WP IDHT

G'day Redrose64

I'm afraid I believe this edit to be disruptive, unintentionally I hope.

You accuse me of violating wp:IDHT, a behavioural guideline. This is fair enough if you believe it to be true, but wt:Talk page guidelines is not the appropriate place to do it.

It's not the first time, but by far the worst, as you have repeated the allegation in the edit summary. Again, this is not the place for it.

If you wish to question my behaviour, there are channels for this. Please use them, and desist from these inappropriate posts. Andrewa (talk) 21:06, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

This post is a case in point. You are taking my words and twisting them into something that I simply DID NOT SAY. I am FED UP of having to explain, over and over again, the same points. Others are also having to repeat themselves. All because you apparently fail to understand; take in; or simply read, the points that we are making. You are clearly provoking us, deliberately. You are being disruptive. End of. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I do not think that post of mine was disruptive, but that is not the point.

The point is, your raising these behavioural issues on that talk page is itself disruptive whether or not they are justified. Please desist. Andrewa (talk) 22:31, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Desist yourself. STOP pretending that you don't see this as disruptive, or at the very least, open to misunderstanding. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

What exactly do you wish me to stop doing? I am pretending nothing.

As I have said previously, I did deliberately provide the edit you cite as an example of what is meant by interleaving and to ask whether anyone really had trouble with it, and it seems to have answered that question well. I have apologised if anyone was offended by it. In that context, I believe it was a legitimate and helpful edit. What was the alternative? Another editor has said An artificial example could prove anything. This is a concrete example, and has clarified the issues a great deal IMO. It's about as simple and harmless an example of interleaving as I can imagine, and yet it has confused screenreaders and irritated and confused people. That is important information.

So I'm certainly now aware that the edit is open to misunderstanding. And testing that was exactly the point in making it.

But again, that is not the issue here. Behavioural issues should not be raised on project talk pages, let alone in their edit summaries. That is the issue. Please desist. Andrewa (talk) 03:04, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

An issue with a template notice, maybe?

Hi RR - I think there may be an issue with a template notice at AHA Foundation and I don't know how to fix it. The merge discussion notice for the infobox reaches into the lead paragraph. Will you take a look at it when you have time? Thanks bunches... 16:31, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

@Atsme: It seems to, but actually it doesn't. The horizontal line below the word "merging" is the bottom edge of a floated box; if you imagine a vertical line beginning at the left-hand end of that horizontal line and going upwards, essentially the (non-existent) left border of the same floated box, this imaginary line doesn't cut through any text - the lead section text is all to its left. This is what happens when you have two right-aligned floated boxes that are different widths. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thx. When viewing it on my iPad using Safari, it appears as you described. On my 15" laptop using Firefox, it appears to the left of the infobox and imposes on the first line of the justified paragraph. Perhaps it's a browser/screen width issue. At least it's not a permanent issue, so not a biggy. Thanks again. 10:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

WP:PREVIEW callouts

Only used what the tool suggested (the edit was marked as "assisted")—would have been easier to have just fixed the template czar 02:27, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Czar: I did fix the template. But tool or not, you are responsible for every edit that you make. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:51, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

I meant this, and I generally am czar 21:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Your intervention on 'State Atheism'

Hello - thanks for your intervention, but the RfC was about a simple WP:POLICY transgression, as the article does that (WP:NEOLOGISM) without even considering the content; inviting a content-debate will only distract from (and, predictably, drown) that, and one can easily conclude that that was the intended goal (of adding the categories/'extra' RfC).
If I have misunderstood something about RfC policy-ing (by your comment it would seem that you think that I intend to change Misplaced Pages policy itself), please let me know a better place/way of inviting attention/advice about articles that fall short of Misplaced Pages policy, as, according to recent experience and the page's history, any attempt to make the article conform to Misplaced Pages policy will most most likely be reverted (edit-warred) - that is the very reason I opened the RfC. Thank you. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 23:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
PS: You also added a 'society sports and culture' category that has nothing at all to do with even the article content (why not 'history'?) - now the RfC is about everything but its original topic. THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 00:14, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

@ThePromenader: The |policy parameter - which puts the RfC into Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines - is not for discussions where the application of policy to an article is in dispute, but for discussions about changing the policy itself. For disputes concerning article content, the following are available:

• Biographies (bio)
• Economy, trade, and companies (econ)
• History and geography (hist)
• Language and linguistics (lang)
• Maths, science, and technology (sci)
• Media, the arts, and architecture (media)
• Politics, government, and law (pol)
• Religion and philosophy (reli)
• Society, sports, and culture (soc)

see also the table at WP:RFC#Categories. Clearly "Politics, government, and law" (which covers the state) and "Religion and philosophy" (which covers atheism) are directly relevant here; I included "Society, sports, and culture" because the way that people behave is also relevant: as shown at the top of our article on Society, a large social group sharing the same geographical or social territory, typically subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations. The fact that the rfc category covers sports as well had no bearing on my choice - I am not implying that it is a sports matter in any way. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Actually, adding the extra categories isn't harmful at all, as it brings more eyes to the question, but through focusing on the WP:POLICY angle, I wanted to a) avoid needlessly 'blasting' thousands of contributors (as mentioned in the RfC guidelines) and b) keep the discussion to that one point; having more input from everywhere making it a 'content', not a policy, issue... the road to making a decision on the RfC point of contention (that remains) will be a much longer one, that's all.

I misunderstood that RfC 'policy' issues are about the policies themselves, and I'm sorry about that, and I was in no way implying any underlying motive in your action; I just didn't understand your addition (and not another). And since we're already there, I may as well add 'history' to the RfC as well, because that is what the article is rooted in (and its title's absence from historical consensus). Thanks, and cheers.THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 08:30, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Inability to print out hard copies of Misplaced Pages RDT line templates

We have just returned from a two week holiday in Cornwall and I wished to make hard copy prints of both the West Coastway Main Line RDT line template and the South Western Main Line RDT line template as both of these have had a closed station added to them. However, as was the case quite some time ago, I am unable to make such hard copy print out.

I understand that the last time this occurred, someone had done something to prevent this happening and after I highlighted the matter, matters were put right, so I beg your assistance in this matter.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)