Bristol Filer

Welcome Bristol Filer!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,335,930 registered editors!

Hello, Bristol Filer. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions! I'm W.carter, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:   Introduction to Wikipedia   The five pillars of Wikipedia   Editing tutorial   How to edit a page   Simplified Manual of Style   The basics of Wikicode   How to develop an article   How to create an article   Help pages   What Wikipedia is not

Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:   Do be bold   Do assume good faith   Do be civil   Do keep cool!   Do maintain a neutral point of view   Don't spam   Don't infringe copyright   Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest   Don't commit vandalism   Don't get blocked

If you need further help, you can:   Ask a question

or you can:   Get help at the Teahouse

or even:   Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:   Fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Help contribute to articles

Perform maintenance tasks   Become a member of a project that interests you   Help design new templates

Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.

Sincerely, w.carter-Talk 11:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)   (Leave me a message)

• Español
• Deutsch
• Français
• Italiano
• עברית
• Русский
• 日本語
• Polski
• فارسی

How to alert other editors

When someone is posting on your talk page you get an automatic notification. That notification is a small blue sign followed by a long yellow box at the top of your page (for most browsers and settings). In all other cases you have to alert the other editor in some way, either by "ping" or by mentioning them in a link. This will result in just the red sign notification on top of that user's page. So even if you respond on your talk page you still have to alert the editor you are addressing. If you want to get hold of me you write {{ping|W.carter}} resulting in @W.carter: or [[User:W.carter|W.carter]] resulting in W.carter and sign with the four "squiggles" ~~~~ at the end and hit "Save". There are some more, but these are the basics. And when you ask something on someone's talk page, you also create a new section so your question don't get entangled in some other conversation. If you are having a conversation with another user on some page, it is also customary to add that page to your Watchlist in case someone in the discussion forgets to alert.

The policy is to leave an answer on the same page as the question, keep the conversation intact unless there is some reason for moving it elsewhere. Like complicated questions at the Teahouse can be continued on the appropriate talk page. w.carter-Talk 12:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Another sandbox

Just to let you know: You can have as many sandboxes as you like, one for each article. Just click on the links here and create them (and as many as you like), one for each article. No need for you to cramp them all in the first one. :)

• User:Bristol Filer/sandbox-2
• User:Bristol Filer/sandbox-3

Happy editing, w.carter-Talk 16:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Done! --Bristol Filer (talk) 17:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Elliotts

@Rick Block: Having noted the comment made about the Elliott Brothers (builders merchant) Wiki having "multiple issues", and being interested in the history of the company, I have written an extended version of the article. At present it is in draft form in my sandbox. Please have a look at it. If you have no objection I would like to implement it when I have completed all the references. Regards, Bob --Bristol Filer (talk) 20:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The draft in your sandbox looks much improved as far as I can tell. Do you have a personal connection to this company? I don't have any reason to think that you do, but if so beware of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. -- Rick Block (talk)

@Rick Block: I became interested in Elliotts by a rather complicated route. The starting point was the General Electric Company, the one that started in Britain in the 1880s, got transformed in the 1990s into a dot.com company called Marconi and collapsed. My father and grandfather worked for them for a total of about 70 years In the earlier part of the 20th century and I worked for them for a short time. I also work for three years for Elliott Automation in Borehamwood. They were originally called Elliott Brothers Ltd of London. That prompted me to start researching the GEC and the companies that joined it, including Elliotts (via English Electric). I collected a lot of books on the subject but I had none on Elliotts. Then, on eBay one day, I saw a book on Elliott Brothers Ltd. So I bought it. But it turned out to be called "The House of Elliotts" and it was all about the Southampton builders merchants. I tried to sell it but nobody wanted it. Then, while was passing through Southampton I saw one of the branches of the builders merchants and decided to look for them on the web. That's when I found your Wiki with its comments about multiple issues. That prompted me to do read the book. It turned out to be quite interesting so I did a bit of research into the company and I found it even more interesting. Having done all that work I thought it would be a pity not to embody it in the Wiki article. I've been in touch with the company and they have approved the article. I've also been in touch with a bloke called John Birch whose wife is a descendant of Thomas Elliott and who has put their family history on Ancestry.com.--Bristol Filer (talk) 08:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Rick Block: I've now had a look at the Conflict of Interest article and I'm sure there isn't any. I'm certainly not on their payroll and am not going to get paid for adding the information. --Bristol Filer (talk) 17:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Rick Block: I've completed the first draft and, if there isn't to much further input from various sources, I'll be implementing the update shortly.--Bristol Filer (talk) 07:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I see that the draft is comming along nicely. Still a lot of "wikifying" to be done before it is ready for the Main Space. I've come down with a cold so I'm pinging @Philg88: to help you out a bit instead. w.carter-Talk 08:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

References

@W.carter: Please would you tell me why, when I hover over the 1st ref in William Schaw Lindsay, an info box comes up whereas when I do the same for the 1st ref (which I have added) in Elliott Brothers (builders merchant) ) it does not. It's the same in my User:Bristol Filer/sandbox-2. It's annoying because, to read it, you have to click on it which takes you to the bottom of the page. To carry on reading you then have to scroll up again. Regards, Bob Bristol Filer (talk) 09:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

You did everything right, but they are constantly upgrading the system that reads the code so right now the link to the book in the "Bibliography" may appear in two ways: The first is the one you have encountered so far, a small box hovering at the footnote in the text. The second way is that the box appear around the right ref at the bottom of the page instead. If you do this in the Elliott Brothers (builders merchant), look below the "References" section and you will see it. And if you actually click on the footnote number in the text, you will be directed to the ref as well. Try it out and you will see. I know it's a bother, but there is nothing to be done about it. w.carter-Talk 09:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:Thanks. I suspected as much!--Bristol Filer (talk) 10:24, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:

Headings

Hello, I see that things are progressing very nicely in your sandboxes. Good job! Let me give you a little tip on the headings. The style you use now with just the bold text is not used as headings here. Instead you should use the code way with "=". This will not only produce the correct font size but also result in a small [edit] next to the heading so that you can edit one section at the time, which is much easier when handling long texts. Also, when there are more than four main headings the code system will automatically produce a small "index box" on the left side of the page making navigation easier.

So instead of say '''Early life''' you should write == Early life ==. And if you want a subsection of that you add another pair of equals signs. Example === Education === and so on. If you want me to do an initial edit in one of your sandboxes so you can see how it should be, just say so. Or experiment on your own. Here is a short article you can look at as an example. Open it in the editing window and take a look at the code. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Thanks. That's done. Not only does it improve the appearance, but it also makes editing easier as you don't have to scroll up and down so much. Regards--Bristol Filer (talk) 10:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Yep, that's the general idea for the code. Well done! w.carter-Talk 10:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Next up to learn is that external links in the text are a big no-no. In the Elliott Brothers Draft there are no less than four of them in the lead section (first section) and a couple a bit further down in the text. I know that those originate from the present low quality stub article, it's just that nobody have bothered to correct that yet. Don't learn from that mistake. The text should be rewritten and the links dispatched to refs at the end of the sentences. I will correct the present stub article so you can see how it can be done. w.carter-Talk 10:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I also took the liberty of converting the picture you linked to in the article into a real picure. I hope you don't mind. Please remove it otherwise. I also did this to show you the code for inserting pictures. w.carter-Talk 11:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:We're in conflict (I think)! Bristol Filer (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:I've cancelled my minor edit.12:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Bristol Filer (talk) 13:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:Maybe it was someone else – anyway my little edit got saved. I'm going to make a few more comments so please 'hold your horses' (English for 'don't do anything')Bristol Filer (talk) 13:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:I was conflicting with myself! I work on two machines. Sorry about the false alarm.Bristol Filer (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem. :) "Editing conflicts" are a nuisance, but unfortunately unavoidable when working together on a project. Try editing one of the "hot" subjects like a recent event! You'll be lucky if you get an edit in edgewise after four or five attempts. If you have done a larger edit and don't want to loose your text, leave the page with the "edit conflict notice" open (your text is always available somewhere on that page) and open a new window with exactly the same page. Then copy your text from the faulty page to the now updated page. The sectioning of a text is also helping. Two editors can edit different sections on the same page without any editing conflict.

Further: I know most of the English idioms, sayings and even some of the dialects. You can chat away with me just as you would with any Brit. My spelling may not be perfect and I do make some grammatical mistakes, but when reading, I get it all. I will take a look at what you are talking about in the Bibliography. w.carter-Talk 13:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography

I've added 'The House of Elliotts' to the bibliography. It's what I got most of the information for the article from and many of the citations refer to it. But I think I should have been putting 'lasts' in the citations. I'll try doing that but you may have to help me along.

Btw I'm very happy to have the picture of the church in. I'm very unlikely to object to anything you do! I've got one or two other pictures to put in. Regards and thanks again. --Bristol Filer (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the 'lasts' are vital for connecting the {{sfn}}'s in the text with the right book. I see that you have sorted that out. But it is also vital that the dates/years match up. In the text you have the year for 'The House of Elliotts' as 2010, and in the Bibliography it is 1992. These have to be the same. I have a help program for checking things more easily, and it's flashing red allover the page right now. You have to correct this to whichever year is correct. w.carter-Talk 13:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: I've moved the church down to make room for a new image. But it's got two Wiki borders (I only want one), it's on the wrong side of the page and the text isn't wrapped. How many mistakes can I make! --Bristol Filer (talk) 15:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

The double border is just because the is a small white space around the ad itself. Nothing you can do about it. The strange placing was because you had forgot the closing </div> in the code. Also captions should never be in Italics, that format is reserved for special cases. See MOS:ITALIC for further info on this. w.carter-Talk 15:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: I could get rid of the white border in the original image. Have you moved it to Commons? Could I delete it and start again? --Bristol Filer (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

No, I have not moved it yet. Please remember that I'm at work and I have to do my work in-between my answers to you, I was going to take care of that later tonight when I got home. But if you have a completely new, border-free version of the pic you can upload that to Commons. Just remember to give it a slightly different name, otherwise the codes will collide. After that you can mark the file/pic here at the WP for deletion. Or ask me to do it later tonight. w.carter-Talk 16:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Pictures

When you upload pictures, please do that at the Commons instead. That is the picture repository for most of the files that are used on the Wikipedia. Uploading on the WP is only for special pics with troublesome copyrights. Also, a pic uploaded to the Eng Wiki can not be used on any other language Wiki, while pics from the Commons can be used on any of the 292 Wikis in different languages. There is nothing to be done about the clipping you uploaded recently, I will have to request for it to be moved to Commons without breaking any links or code. Please use the Commons in the future, but also bear in mind that you can only upload copyright-free pics. It's a jungle... The page you start at when uploading is this. w.carter-Talk 15:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: I would be happy to delete it and start again--Bristol Filer (talk) 16:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: It moved to the right and the texts wrapped. Did you do that? But it's still got two borders. I'm going to embed one now.--Bristol Filer (talk) 16:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I fixed the problem. Please see my answer in the section above. And don't upload it again! It must be moved the proper way, and I don't think you know how to do that yet. w.carter-Talk 16:11, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Unfortunately you were editing this page while I was trying to tell you to hold your horses again! I would have been happy to delete the Wikipedia image, edit the original image to remove the white border and upload that to Commons. Is it too late? I hate the double border!

Re copyright the advert is in McIlwain and its well over 70 years old.--Bristol Filer (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

As I said above: I have not done anything yet. Since you did not see my answer there I will copy it here. Sorry if I'm sometimes too slow and sometimes fail to "hold my horses", I only try to give you information as soon as I can. Also, nothing is ever too late on the WP. Everything can be reverted.

"Please remember that I'm at work and I have to do my work in-between my answers to you, I was going to take care of that later tonight when I got home. Nothing has been moved or removed. If you have a completely new, border-free version of the pic you can upload that to Commons. Just remember to give it a slightly different name, otherwise the codes will collide. After that you can mark the file/pic here at the WP for deletion. Or ask me to do it later tonight." w.carter-Talk 16:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:I am conscious of your being at work so will try to reduce my questions to a minimum. I will try to put the whole thing right myself so please don't do anything unless (or until) I make a complete mess of it. --Bristol Filer (talk) 16:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Standing by. w.carter-Talk 17:01, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:Phew!--Bristol Filer (talk) 21:19, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikifying

@W.carter:@Philg88:There's no panic on the Elliott article. I'll await input from various sources before making further significant changes. Meanwhile, I'll get back to Lindsay.

Btw The references do not seem to me to be in columns. Perhaps I'm missing something. Regards and thanks, Bob --Bristol Filer (talk) 11:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments on wikifying

You are doing a splendid job with the article! Since you say that you have been editing here for some years before getting an account you are probably aware that no article "belongs" to any single editor and anyone can edit the text you write. That means you don't have to contact or ask permission from the editor who started the article as you have done so far, and you should not be offended if anyone edits your article to improve it.

In order to keep article creation from turning into chaos and to give the articles in the WP the same sort of layout throughout the entire encyclopaedia, there is a set of rules called Wikipedia:Manual of Style or simply MOS that we all have to adhere to. These rules have been hammered out over the years by consensus within the Wikipedia community. The complete text is very long, so it will take some time before you have learned enough of it.

The first step after someone has written an article is to "wikify" it, which is to format, alter and copyedit the text to comply with the rules of the MOS. Most new editors don't like this since they think we slaughter their text. It is something you will have to get used to. Once your text is in the main space, my guess is that it will attract tens of editors all trying to correct it according to MOS.

You are also used to writing websites and therefore used to the html code. Some of that works here as well, but it is discouraged in favour of the wiki code we all use, otherwise you simply make it harder for other editors to edit your text. Here you are not an "author" you are one of many "editors". Being a Wikipedian, is being a part of a collective.

When I give you advise on how you can correct things in the draft, I am not expressing a personal view, I am simply giving you advice according to MOS. I am not sure you realized that before since you reverted some of the things I told you earlier. Your article has great potential to become a very good article, but if it is to be accepted as one of the top articles it has to be written entirely by the book. So there are some things that have to be corrected. Do not be offended by this, the rules are the same for all of us. The article is 'passable' as it is now, but I always think it's best to learn correctly the first time. Here are some points:

• You asked about the ref columns. The setting is now such that the refs will be displayed in the best manner on your screen. If you only see one "column" you either have a small screen or have the setting for the screen such as to show everything a bit bigger. On my screen the refs are in three columns.

• The text needs some more links to other Wikipedia articles. You should scrutinize the text and look for links to places, events and things that might be of interest to readers and link them the first time they are mentioned. It is only the first mention that is linked.

• All links should be checked so that they actually end up where they are supposed to go. The link you made to Territorial Army leads to a disambiguation page with several such. Please specify which Territorial Army it is.

• The text should be copyedited for faulty brackets and other typos. I have corrected some.

• You still have some external links in the text. As I said, those have no place there and should be moved to refs. In the case of "depot of Ben Turner and Son in Claylands Road, a supplier of agricultural machinery [p 88, Ben Turner & Son History]." the page number goes in the ref as well, that has no business in the text. I fixed the first ext. link, but since I'm denied access to the Ben Turner page, you have to set that one right.

• Btw, there is no | in external links as there is in wikilinks, just a space.

• Refs are always inserted after a comma or a full stop, never before them. I have corrected those I could find.

• From ref 52 and onwards you have once again switched to "McIlwain 2010" instead of "McIlwain 1992". Please correct this.

• Most of the pics are far to big. There is a paragraph in MOS that says that pics can be larger than the normal 220px thumbs, but only of there is a special reason for it such as maps, diagrams, text, etc. Otherwise the option is for the reader to click on the pic to see more. I have fixed this.

• The captions must not be formatted in italics or any other way. This is stated in WP:CAPTION Italic typeface is reserved for titles, foreign words, ship names, and so on according to MOS:ITALIC. I have fixed this.

• In an article with pictures, one of them should at the top of the page as the main article picture usually in an infobox. Since this is an article about a company, the Template:Infobox company should be used and pic should be the company logo. Since the logo is protected by copyright it most be uploaded as Wikipedia:Non-free content in the size if will be displayed in (about 220-250px) on the Wikipedia and not the Commons.

• I have added the full infobox, yours to fill in and after that remove the redundant parameters.

• The very first section is called the lead. This is a summery or abstract of the entire article for the "lazy reader". The lead must be reworked to include this.

• Since this is an international encyclopedia, all measurements should be in two or three units using the Help:Convert template, like km and miles or pounds and kilos. I have fixed some.

• There are never any * marked footnotes in an article. This is handled by a set of "Notes" similair to the "References". I have fixed this.

• The text should be void of any 'personal' words or remarks such as:

"Sadly, however, his retirement was not long." That should only be "However, his retirement was not long." Always keep a neutral tone. Who knows, there might be those who did not think it sad that his retirement was not long.

Or the "Of course, after his experiences in Worthing, he was always careful to get a binding agreement before he started work." should only be "After his experiences in Worthing, he was always careful to get a binding agreement before he started work."

Or "a very considerable sum for the time" should only be "a considerable sum for the time"

For further info on this see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Please go through the text and remove such words and condense the text to a more encyclopedic form. I have corrected some, but the text needs more copyediting.

• Dates should be comnnected to the months by a small template called {{nbsp}} so that they do not get seperated when text text adjusts to different screens. I have fixed what I could find. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers.

• Years should be written with dashes not ordinary hyphens. I have fixed this.

• The use of the {{As of|}} is described in WP:DATED.

• When you write wikilinks there should be no space between the | and the second part. So it's [[River Itchen, Hampshire|River Itchen]] not [[River Itchen, Hampshire| River Itchen]]

• I have also changed the slanted quotation marks ( ’ ) left from when you copy pasted the text from the previous formatted medium you had it on, into straight ones ( ' ) that does not corrupt the coding. This is always a problem when copy pasting since the fault is so hard to see.

There are also some other minor things I have commented on in the text. You wills see them as you read the article. If you want to see exactly what I've done, click on this diff and you can see the two versions compared side by side.

If you want to see how all these rules come together in some of the best articles you should take a look at the Featured articles. Those are the best articles to get inspiration from. Once you have checked out the points above, I will take another look at the article and see what remains to be done before we move it to the main space. Best, w.carter-Talk 22:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

P.S. How do you know that this picture is copyright free? Is it stated on the product you scanned/photographed/took it from or have you asked for permission yourself to use it? w.carter-Talk 22:36, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

---

@W.carter: Thanks for all that. I hope, with your cold, you haven't been up all night! Anyway I appreciate what you've done. I will certainly endeavor make all the corrections and will take heed of what you have said in my future articles.

• My machine has two 24" screens but I usually divide each into two windows so I can have four windows visible simultaneously. However, using the full width of the screen I can see three columns now. Magic!

• I'm aware that anyone can edit a Wiki – that's what I'm doing with this one. But since it's such a wholesale change I thought it only polite to inform Rick Block that I would in effect be replacing the article.

• I'm very happy to have more links to Wiki articles but I read somewhere that you should not use too many. However, I will ignore that advice and take heed of what you say.

• I've already asked Elliotts if I can use the aerial view and if they would let me have a higher resolution version. I'm sure they will say yes on both counts.

• I've asked the company for their latest report in order to complete the Infobox. I guess the parameters should be entered after the appropriate equal signs. However, when I tried putting "Elliott Brothers Ltd" after "| name = " the words ended up outside the box. Btw, I'm a bit hesitant to include an infobox as it means I will be saddled with the task of updating it every year! But they're a friendly firm with good employee relations so I'll do it.

• With one exception all the refs were already either after a comma or full stop in your revised version. The exception was where there was no punctuation in a sentence at the beginning of the Blanchard's section. I've now moved that reference to the end of the sentence.

• The 85 before the reference near the end of the "Elliotts after WWII" section was a leftover from the references in the Word document that I used to write the original article. I just forgot to delete that one. Btw I find Word useful for doing batch changes such as changing the dates in the references from 2010 to 1992 (which I've done). Is there a similar tool in Wikipedia?

• I'm currently working on the lead.

• In spite of being British, as an engineer, I've been using SI since the early 1970s. I don't really like units such as feet (or even ft), but I was quoting from the original document. As I think the we (the British – and the Americans for that matter) need to be weaned* off using non-SI units I'm considering not using them unless absolutely necessary. An example of one that does still seem to be necessary is 'tonnage' when referring to old ships. In fact Wikipedia also uses the term for modern ships. The tonne, though non-SI, has, like the hectare, been accepted as a sort of honorary member of the system. Btw I don't like the term kilo. It's a multiple not a unit. Sorry to bore you with all this. For the present I will retain your changes with respect to units.

* I'll be impressed if you don't have to look that word up!

• I should have said that the asterisk after quoting assets and liabilities was temporary. When I get the latest company report I'll make reference to that. The info will go in the infobox anyway.

• Sadly sadly I must take your point about personal remarks.

• Thanks for telling me about the Wikipedia version of the hard space.

• When I wrote "as of 2015" I meant it to stay that way. If I allowed the date to change I would have to revise the information when the MD changes. I might not remember to do that.

• I have noticed that Wikipedia uses dashes rather than hyphens in connected years. I don't like it but I'll have to accept it.

• The slanted quotes came about because I copied the text direct from Word. In future I will copy and paste Word documents to a text editor first.

One more comment. Like you, I am by nature a perfectionist. But one of my bosses once surprised me by saying: "If a job is worth doing it's worth doing badly". I'm not chastising you in any way. Quite the opposite. I reckon I've been lucky to find you and I'm very grateful for all the help you've given me. But I have many things to do and not much time left to do them (I'm 78). If I spend too long getting everything absolutely perfect, I won't finish what I want to do. In fact I'll hardly finish anything! Regards, Bob --Bristol Filer (talk) 12:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments on wikifying part 2

Thanks for taking my rather lengthy comment in such a good spirit. I was almost hesitant to write it all, but honesty got the better of me. It will not be as bad the next time, I promise. :) Even if it seems like a lot of "complaining", you are doing a very good job with your writings and I think the WP is fortunate to have you donate so much of your time to articles here. I will get back to you in more detail tonight. I'm feeling a bit better and I know I'll be even better then. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 12:50, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:Please don't hesitate to make your comments as long as you think fit. I'm always happy to learn. Did you have to look up the meaning of the word 'wean'? Perhaps not, because it sounds vaguely Scandinavian.

The owner of the family tree from whom I got the information about the Elliott family is John Birch, the husband of a member of the Elliott family. I am in touch with him and we have exchanged information. Since my last missive a booklet written by him has arrived in the post. It's called "The Elliotts Dynasty". I will be putting some information from that into the article.--Bristol Filer (talk) 13:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

No, I did not have to look up the word , I know it very well. But then again I have 'cheated' and lived in both the UK and the US. I love languages and their origins and I call the English language "the love of my life". You are quite right that it sounds Scandinavian, as do many older words and dialects in the UK, especially Scottish. The Swedish word for 'wean' is vänja so very similar. The 'ä' is a Swedish letter that is pronounced something like the 'a' in English 'take'. Lookng forward to what the new booklet will add to the article. w.carter-Talk 13:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Hej. I think it's worthwhile you're having a look at Elliotts again. I've implemented almost all of the suggestions you made. A notable exception is the infobox. I won't be able to do that until I get the company report. I did try putting the company logo in it, but failed. It's at http://elliotts.uk.com/sites/all/themes/elliotts/images/logo.png. I could of course put it on Commons as an image but I would only do that if it's impossible to do it direct from the URL.

I've also added a photograph of Thomas Elliott that I got from John Birch's book. It's not wonderful but you can't expect a great deal more from an 1855 photograph. John has given me carte blanche to reproduce any of the photos in his book, though I think there are enough images in the article already. Adding the photograph meant pushing the church and the advert down a bit.

In case you're wondering about my greeting, I've known the word for a long time although it's the only Scandinavian word I do know. My favourite composer is Scandinavian though not Swedish. That's how I know the word. I'll leave you to guess who he is although it's pretty obvious. His 150th birthday was celebrated last year along with that of his Finnish friend. Krya på dig --Bristol Filer (talk) 20:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hej igen! Thank you for the greeting. :) I was working on a reply to you when I got your 'ping'. I'll just leave it as I had written it and add this note first. I will sort out the logo for you, probably tomorrow, as it has to be uploaded on the Wikipedia with some very specific licenses and paragraphs, plus a print screen of the logo. Please do not attempt this yourself.

So here are my comments to your reply. Some of the points do not need any further comment so I'll just skip them. I'm sure you will know what I mean anyway.

• Politeness always goes a very long way on the WP, just don't expect to get any in return. There are a lot of grumpy editors here.

• "Too many wikilinks" is when editors start to link commonplace things like window, United Kingdom, house, company. You get my meaning. That is how it's done on several other wikis (including the Swedish), but not here. I think your judgment is sound enough to know where to draw the line.

• Just having Elliotts giving you permission to use their pics is unfortunately not enough for the Commons (or Wikipedia). They have to send an email stating this to the Commons where they state that they abandon the copyright for the pic. This is called an OTRS ticket. Without it there is a risk of getting the file deleted.

• The name of the company always appears outside the infobox. That is the way the layout is made. Look at these other companies and you will see: Pilkington, Aggregate Industries, Wolseley plc. Don't worry about including an infobox, if you don't do it someone else will. And it is certainly not your job to maintain the article once you have released it to the main! Once there it becomes the responsibility of the WP community and other editors will take over and help maintain it. While many editors keep a watchful eye on their creations, having a too strong grip on them is never good either.

• From what I've heard there are some scripts that can be fashioned into some sort of tools for batch changes, but I have no idea how they work.

• The multiple units are just for the benefits of readers from different countries and cultures. They are also useful when, as you say, you use the units from an original text and they have to be converted into more modern measures to better understand the text.

• The whole ide with using the {{As of|}} template is to mark that the fact may be subject to change. The code will place this "marked fact" in a category where facts that need to be checked once in a while are listed. That is so you don't have to keep track of it. There are other who do that. Here is the full list of such facts: Category:All articles containing potentially dated statements.

Finally, don't worry about having too little time. :) There are thousands of editors here who will help fix your articles sooner or later. I just wanted you to have as much good information as possible for this first article. I could easily just have corrected everything I commented on, but that would be a poor way of teaching you how things are done here. It was also to give you a heads up as to what will happen once your article "goes live". If you want to write more rough articles in the future, that is entirely up to you. At least now you know what to expect. We are just grateful that you keep up the good work as long as you can or like. Best, w.carter-Talk 20:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:I've added two lines to the info box as a temporary measure so that people can locate it more easily. Please leave it in until the box is completed properly.

The Iron Cross

@W.carter: Hej. I've been meaning to tell you for some time that a fellow countryman of yours, Jonas Ericsson, emailed me a couple of weeks back expressing surprise that, after she struck the Storgrundsbädan Rock, the Iron Cross was towed to Söderamn. That's what I had stated near the end of my website at https://sites.google.com/site/therobertlowe/. Jonas is a diver and he is interested in finding the remains of the ship. I checked my sources and found that the newspapers of the time had been confusing Söderarm with Söderamn and that the likelihood was that what remained of the ship was left at the Storgrundsbädan Rock. That pleased Jonas as it would give him a new diving project. But he says that he needs first to borrow a better "sonar fish" to search deeper around the rock. I've corrected my website to delete the reference to Söderamn. I hope I will need to change it again when Jonas finds some relics of the ship.--Bristol Filer (talk) 07:53, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there and god morgon, I feel a bit better today but I have tons of work to catch up with now. That sounds like a fascinating project. Though I think that the original confusion was between Söderhamn not Söderamn (there is no place with that name) and Söderarm. Söderarm is one of the old legendary light houses here and a constant position on the Swedish equivalent of the Shipping Forecast. Marine archeology is fascinating, take a brief look at this article I wrote some time ago. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 08:52, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Yes it was definitely Söderhamn. I think the British newspapers got the spelling wrong as well.

I found your article on Bulverket quite interesting. It reminded me of a discovery made in South Wales last year. You can see it at http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/ancient-lakeside-settlement-older-pyramids-9702162. I see your interest in language coming through. A small point – in the UK, the British Commonwealth and maybe United States, the person in charge at an important tennis match is called an umpire (as in cricket) not a judge. There are judges present but they are line judges who determine whether or not the ball is over the line. I also noticed that you use the non-preferred cm rather than the mm. I'm always worrying about units. If you buy timber from Elliotts it will either be measured in metres or, more likely, mm, never cm. However the cm is used in primary schools as it is reckoned that the mm is too small for infants to cope with. I disagree. --Bristol Filer (talk) 10:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Doh! Of course it should be 'umpire'. I know that word but my brain did not pick it up when I wrote the article. Thanks!! It is now corrected. The common practice for, well everything, on the WP is that articles should be written in US standards since it is a US company and the servers are stationed there and therefore subject to US law and everything. That is the default option. Second is that an article should reflect the common practice of words, terms, dates, measurements etc. used in the country the article is about. In Sweden we favor cm over mm since it is simply easier to say the measurements when speaking about things in daily life, that's why it's used in the article. w.carter-Talk 11:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Logo

The logo for the company is now in place. It has to be uploaded with a so called Non-free use rationale. Take a look at how it's done here: File:Elliott Brothers Limited logo.jpg. I added it to the infobox plus corrected a few minor typos I noticed in the article. w.carter-Talk 10:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter:Thanks. It looks good. Is permission needed from the company? I'm sure they'll give it.--Bristol Filer (talk) 10:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: You really must get on with your work now and I must get on with Lindsay. So let's put Elliotts "on the back burner" for a while. --Bristol Filer (talk) 10:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

 Done The WP is addictive though... No permission needed from the company for this since the use is limited to just the page about the company on the WP. Which reminds me that I have to "comment it out" while it's in your sandbox since the permission doesn't cover that. My mistake! w.carter-Talk 11:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: That's a pity because it look quite good while it was there. Would it be very wrong to replace the original article now? Don't forget to look at the crannog webpage (see previous section).--Bristol Filer (talk) 11:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

You can go ahead and replace the article now if you like. We can continue to edit and correct it when it's in the main. Just be prepared for more 'edit conflicts' once it's there since it will no doubt attract other editors. Don't forget to remove the arrows and my comment by the logo once it's in the main. w.carter-Talk 11:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: That's done – but I've left it in the sandbox too as I've been directing people there. Do I now just wait in the hope that the comments about not meeting the guidelines will be removed, or should I be more proactive?

Good job! I've already removed the tag. Just remember that from now on you have to leave an edit summery for every edit you make on the article. And remember to sign your posts with the ~~~~ otherwise the ping won't work. w.carter-Talk 11:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Adjö – and thanks again for all your help.--Bristol Filer (talk) 12:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem! :) Just a note: Hej då! is a more proper way of saying 'Bye!'. Adjö means we are never likely to meet or speak with each other ever again, and that would be a pity. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 13:03, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: That possibility did occur to me, so I used Google translate to find out the Swedish equivalent of the French au revoir. But it clearly came up with the wrong word! Sorry about that – and Hej då! --Bristol Filer (talk) 13:30, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Blanchards

There's something wrong with the information I've given in the Ben Turner reference in the last sentence of the Blanchard section of the Elliott Wiki. I'm checking its validity now but am not getting very far. I'll probably delete the reference and maybe the whole sentence.The alternative would be to leave it in place and wait for somebody to correct it – but I don't think that would happen.

I see you've been busy on the Wiki. Thanks for that. I hope you're making progress with your work at the same time!--Bristol Filer (talk) 09:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

For now, you can just remove the ref and replace it with the tag {{cn|date=March 2016}}. That way the sentence stays and you, or someone else, can correct it later. Work is progressing fine, but we all need a hobby to relax with once in a while, and the WP is one of mine. :) w.carter-Talk 11:19, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

That's done, thanks. Being a student of languages you might like what I've just heard on the radio. George W Bush is reputed as having said "The trouble with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur". It's so stupid that I believe it!--Bristol Filer (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

w.carter-Talk 12:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)