Bree's Block

Welcome

Hello Bree's Block, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

---

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

• Table of contents

• Department directory

Need help?

• Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
• Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
• Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

• Article wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
• The simplified ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
• Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

• Community portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Bree's Block, good luck, and have fun. --tutterMouse (talk) 07:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Smiling atom

A tag has been placed on Smiling atom, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Foregate Street station two way working on both lines.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:Foregate Street station two way working on both lines.jpg

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

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

• "Description" was present; "author" had somehow gone missing - is same as "source" - now updated Bree's Block (talk) 22:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flannan Isles Lighthouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paraffin (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) 10:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Lord of the Dynamos, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bully and Salaam (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) 13:02, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Metaldehyde, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sublime (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) 22:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Fell locomotive

Hi, do you have any more information on the Fell's superchargers? Clough says "turbochargers" (which I think is reasonable to infer as "mechanically-driven centrifugal"), but the small-scale GA drawing shows the sort of asymmetry that would suggest Roots (and not vane either). I have no idea who Holmes-Comerville were. Do you have any better sources on the Fell? I presume there are I. Loco E. papers on it, but I don't have anything myself. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I think "turbochargers" in relation to the Fell is probably a bit of confusion arising from the original Paxman Hi-Dyne engine out of which the Fell concept was developed; this did use an exhaust-driven turbocharger, sized to give full output at low engine speeds, to avoid the complication of either an infinitely-variable supercharger drive or an auxiliary supercharger drive engine. (I guess the surplus boost at higher engine speeds was simply dumped.) paxmanhistory.org.uk is clear that the Fell used Roots-type blowers (as one would expect, see next para).

As for Holmes-Connersville... the "Connersville" bit is the Connersville Blower Company of Connersville, Indiana, who refined the original Roots design and later merged with Roots (also of Connersville) to form the Roots Connersville Blower Company. "Holmes" refers to WC Holmes of Huddersfield, Yorkshire, who manufactured some Connersville products under licence. Their main business was manufacturing equipment for the production and distribution of town gas, including other licensed Connersville designs such as exhausters and gas meters which use the same principle as the blower.

I'm afraid my best source on the Fell is Google... before the coming of the internet I vaguely knew of its existence but that was all; what I know about it now is all stuff I've found by googling. The ILocoE and the SAE both have papers on it by Lt-Col. Fell himself but since they cost as much as a whole book I do not have copies. It seems to have largely escaped the attention of writers documenting the experimental locomotives of the period - shame that JK Lewis wasn't interested in it (his "The Western's Hydraulics" IMO sets the standard for such works). Bree's Block (talk) 04:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Connersville information and especially for the Lewis book recommendation. I've been working on articles on the Mekydro and Voith transmissions, mostly based on the Clough book – I'd always wondered why the WR couldn't make diesel-hydraulics work when Germany managed to. I'm sure this book would be a good source too. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

In that case I would definitely recommend the Lewis book. Not so much for mechanical details of the transmissions - though he isn't lacking on that, giving enough to understand how they work as well as (more important in the context) plenty on the part they and the variations of them played in the story - but for the very good understanding he conveys of the complex tangle of political and engineering considerations which make up the story of the hydraulics. Unlike most of the diesel classes which died an early death there is no one overriding factor which you can point to and say "that's the reason". Certainly there was nothing fundamentally unsound about the diesel-hydraulic principle, and in my opinion we'd have been better off adopting it nationwide instead of diesel-electrics. Bree's Block (talk) 04:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

My copy of the Lewis book has arrived. Looks very good and I'm looking forward to it. Thanks for the recommendation. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Single Factor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Decca (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) 09:10, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, I'm Mutt Lunker. I noticed that you made a change to an article, List of British words not widely used in the United States, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:25, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Check your PC

It broke an article here [1], maybe because of some plugin in your browser. Materialscientist (talk) 09:29, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Article is not broken, nor is my PC. Bree's Block (talk) 09:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Look again [2] and notice that your edit messed up all single/double dashes, which is most noticeable in the infobox on the top right. I have reinstated your addition, but please do check your PC and don't repeat such edits. Materialscientist (talk) 10:08, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I see all the - signs highlighted in one colour on one side and the other colour on the other, for no apparent reason. I didn't go near the infobox at all. Bree's Block (talk) 03:03, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe you didn't, but your PC did, which is why I've started this threat. Materialscientist (talk) 04:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bree's Block: I have noticed you doing this on railway-related articles several times over the last few weeks: Midland Railway (12 March 2015); Rail accidents at Morpeth (16 March); British Rail Class 222 (24 March); British Rail Class 42 (28 March); British Rail Class 52 (28 March). In most cases, you have altered an en-dash (both spaced and unspaced) to a spaced hyphen, and besides causing the occasional error message (for example, the "" seen in the second bullet at British Rail Class 42#References, which wasn't there before) this goes against MOS:ENDASH; accordingly,

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

No wonder I don't see any difference then, since "dash" and "hyphen" are just two different names for a - sign. There would be something wrong if I did see a difference. Bree's Block (talk) 03:03, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

They are not two different names for a - sign – they are different characters, and have different purposes. A hyphen (-) is short (see MOS:HYPHEN for usage); an en-dash (–) is medium-length (see MOS:ENDASH for usage); an em-dash (—) is long (see MOS:EMDASH for usage). The hyphen is almost never spaced; the en-dash is sometimes spaced and sometimes unspaced, depending upon its purpose; and the em-dash is never spaced. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

...and what do I see above? Three characters which are all identical. Bree's Block (talk) 00:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

They became identical after your edit [3]. Please understand that wikipedia pages are compiled, and some characters drastically change the output. Materialscientist (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

They were identical before. The only difference visible in that link is the colour of the highlighting. Bree's Block (talk) 05:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

You have done it again, both by altering dashes to hyphens and by inserting spaces that were not there before (look on the left-hand side for characters having a background coloured like this, and on the right-hand side for characters (including spaces) having a background coloured like this - these colours show the changes), despite being asked not to do either of those things; and since it was my post that you altered (twice), I am formally giving notice as follows:

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

You did not read my previous comment. I repeat: "the only difference visible is the colour of the highlighting". The characters highlighted are identical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bree's Block (talk • contribs) 11:12, 30 March 2015

The coloured backgrounds indicate that a change did occur, which you have repeated. This changes its meaning, which is not just undesirable: it also goes against WP:TPO which states "Never edit ... someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page" - you have demonstrably violated this three times now. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I have NOT edited your comment. Not once, let alone three times. I have simply added my own. The coloured backgrounds are not indicating anything - they are on the same things, the only difference is the colour. Imagine the word "apples" on an orange background and also the word "apples" on a blue background. They are the same word, just on a different background colour. You are trying to make out that that would be a change, which is plainly nonsense. As for "changing its meaning", there is no meaning in the first place, since you have put a - three times and tried to make out it's three different things when it plainly, clearly and visibly isn't, which does not make sense. Pack it in with the "you altered this" and "you edited that" when I have NOT edited or altered anything, and you can also get rid of that "formally giving notice" nonsense about something which I have NOT DONE. I haven't been anywhere near your comment, and I know this better than you, and also better than some thing which is highlighting things as "changed" when they aren't, because it's me that didn't do it. I know what I did and didn't type and anyone or anything that tries to tell me I did something that I know I did not do is quite simply wrong. And on top of this the thing you're trying to make out I'm doing isn't even possible because "changing an X to an X" has no meaning. I am sure there are millions of better things for you to do with your life than making up some of the most ridiculous nonsense I've ever come across and using it as a pretext to attack some random person for no reason at all, so go and do some of them and get off my back. Bree's Block (talk) 00:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Your talk page is on my watchlist from my post above about minor edits, so I have no particular beef about this different issue. Each time you post here, the characters in question change length, indicated by the blue and orange highlights. You may not be able to see the difference but there is one and you or your computer must be doing it, whether intentionally or not. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

It appears that you have your computer set up so that you are unable to distinguish hyphens from n-dashes, and so that it replaces n-dashes by hyphens. If you are unable to fix this, it might be best to avoid editing Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 10:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

You can see the three different dash characters hyphen, en dash, em dash "- – —" as images below the left box here: http://rishida.net/uniview/?charlist=-%20%E2%80%93%20%E2%80%94. The quoted "- – —" in my post displays them with three different lengths (short, longer, longest) for me and others with correctly working browsers. Your browser will probably change them all to hyphens if you edit this section so I suggest you only edit the following section to avoid confusion. Some browsers may be unable to display the length difference between the characters but in your case the browser also changes the actual character when you save. I haven't seen that happen before. Wikipedia uses en dash and em dash a lot in articles in accordance with MOS:DASH so please don't edit articles with your current browser as long as it changes these characters. If you see different colors on what looks like the same character to your browser in a diff then something was changed. The characters are encoded with different numbers and the diff software can register this very reliably. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Detective work

Bree's Block, its my guess that you're using a Mac. Am I correct? If I am, please read this and try and implement the fix they suggest. Thanks. - X201 (talk) 11:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Torx-hex-contact-angles-forces.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Torx-hex-contact-angles-forces.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. User:GKFX^talk 22:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Back pressure for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Back pressure, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Back pressure until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2022 (UTC)