User talk:Keith D/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20

You have a new message.

I just wanted to say hello!--Daniel L. Barth (talk) 20:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Keith D (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Bio articles

Hi Keith. I am trying to get the 2 bio pages of Cliff Stanford and Michael Lawrie up to date as a start to my UK Internet Pioneers pages and I saw you tagged Lawrie's page as needing more. Do you have any advice? Stanford's doesn't have a rating yet. Foxywizard (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess I should have removed the Stub-class rating, as it looks like it should be Start-class, when I added the tag, I usually leave it to the Biography project to rate but must have hit save. The problem as I see it with the article is the large number of jargon words, I know they are linked, but would be better to put them in full the first time that are used, MUDs MUD1, MIST etc. which to most people are meaningless and would need to open up the page to get an idea of what we are talking about. Normally the birth location is not put in the lead but in the first section with a title something like "early years" which give some background to the person. Referencing needs to be looked at by giving more detail of the reference. It is best to switch over to using one of the {{Cite}} templates, though this is not essential. Keith D (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah. I shall look at doing it that way and making it make more sense. As you may have guessed I am somewhat new to this so thanks for your input, do you mind me asking more questions if any come up? Foxywizard (talk) 17:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

No I do not mind, though biographical articles are not my strong point. Keith D (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers. I'll change the rating on both to Start-class as you suggest and see if anyone else is willing to jump in too.Foxywizard (talk) 19:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

East Riding of Yorkshire part II

What else do we need to do to the East Riding, please? I noticed the tweaks, thanks. (I've been at family "doos" in Leeds!!! over the weekend so kept an eye out on the mobile 'phone.) As GA reviews seem to be taking so long, maybe we could nominate ER fairly soon? --Harkey (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

GA reviews are over a month at the moment Drax Power Station was put in in mid-August and not come to the top of the pile yet.

On the governance section there is no mention of the number of wards/councillors that make up the council which would be good to add in. Also there appears to be nothing on religion, though Beverly Minster gets a passing reference in the attractions section. Probably needs a mention in the demographics section and a section on the churches with note of Anglican/Roman Catholic Diocese that covers it etc. The lead may also need looking at as it does not summarise the article much just a few bits on governance & history. The other problem area may be the gallery, but not sure what to do there. I would think once we have done those we could put in for a review and see what they have to say, we should have a month to do more if we think of them.

I got sidetracked on the number of schools given and the ones in the list. I thought of converting it to a similar format to List of schools in Hull which I created and then started to fill in the missing web sites instead, which is part done.

I hope you have not been stirring it in Leeds, things seem to have gone downhill on that front with lots of accusations flying about on the talk pages, I am keeping my head down at the moment. Keith D (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you know anything about Sykes Churches Trail? It looks interesting but I can't get their website to actually link to anywhere.--Harkey (talk) 17:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

There was a good leaflet thing on the East Riding Council web site, but it appears to have disappeared, that gave details of each of the churches. I guess the tourist information centres will have copies, I may still have a copy somewhere but filing system is not good so may not be able to put hands on it. Keith D (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thinking about it I seem to remember there was 2 leaflets one for the northern churches and one for the southern churches. Keith D (talk) 18:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. This may be an excuse to visit the Humber Bridge country park where there is a well stocked tourist information centre!!--Harkey (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The leaflet is mentioned on bottom right hand corner of the archive of another leaflet here which is probably the one linked on the trail article. Keith D (talk) 18:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Good work Batman! I've also just remembered the Sykes memorial and Sledmere. Aargh!!--Harkey (talk) 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I can do even better I have located the southern route file that I downloaded a couple of years ago so will e-mail it. Keith D (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

(reset) Got it thanks. I'll crunch the text tomorrow. (Whisper, whisper → Was there ever a list of notable people?) and is the old AA box at the bottom of Garrowby hill a listed building? Just trying to add a bit of interest.--Harkey (talk) 19:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message re: popular pages. I've been laid low with a dose of the Leeds lurgy. "Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible."

BTW. Do you remember the East Yorkshire buses with pointed roofs so they could get through the North Bar at Beverley? It would make a good DYK item sometime.--Harkey (talk) 12:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes I do remember them, there was a news article when they were withdrawn. Not sure if it is the same buses that had the seats all together with the aisle down the side on the upper deck. I put North Bar on the to-do list for creation as there was some celebrations earlier this year for its 600th anniversary and the article on it mentions the buses. Keith D (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the East Riding Lead section needs a bit more work. Anything else that you have spotted?--Harkey (talk) 17:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Need to have a look at the images, may be disperse the ones from the gallery through the article or bring it into line with WP:IG. Also there is the alternative text that needs adding.

I was wondering if a peer review may be appropriate as GA is taking so long and may catch some things we have missed. Keith D (talk) 17:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I think two out of the three Beverley images could be lost (maybe keep the market one?), and I'm not too sure how appropriate the Hull tidal barrier is to this particular article. I will think of some alternative text for the others if you can get them positioned in the right places.(When I do it it seems to throw the sections out or bunch up the edits!)--Harkey (talk) 17:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Not much scope for the images. The market image could go under the gas terminal one and the Skidby one could go in the Places of interest section. Governance has a slot but probably need a photo of County Hall for there. Cannot see where the Bridlington, Flamborough & Spurn ones fit. May be a gallery with a theme of coastal locations that may get by WP:IG. Keith D (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Another thought may be we should start the List of people from the East Riding of Yorkshire article and link it in from the See also section or put in a short summary section on the people from the county. May be better to go with the newer alphabetical list that the List of people from Manchester was converted to rather than the sectioned list like we did for List of people from Kingston upon Hull. Keith D (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I prefer the sectioned list, but if the alphabetised one is to become the norm, then we are better going that way to save work later on. I suppose a sortable table would answer both. With columns for Name, Area of Notability(or some such heading), Notes and links. It would make it more difficult to edit, though. (Which can be either good or bad!)--Harkey (talk) 11:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I think I prefer the tabular versions rather than just the pure textural versions as can quickly scan them. May be we could look for a good example and go with that. The Yorkshire one is tabular and sectionalised. Keith D (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Categories

Hi. Correct me if I'm wrong, but (a) Category:Grade I listed buildings in York is a sub-cat of (b) Category:Buildings and structures in York, which is a sub-cat of (c) Category:Buildings and structures in North Yorkshire, so there's no reason to add, as you did, (c) to the categories for St Anthony's Hall, is there? Best. GuillaumeTell 23:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You are right, I had not spotted that there was another sub-category when I added it. Keith D (talk) 23:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't help feeling that there ought somewhere to be an easy-to-understand pyramid-type chart of Yorkshire categories so that we all know where we are. GuillaumeTell 00:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2009

Delivered October 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 08:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

33rd Regt

Hi Keith! Thanks for doing the bits on the page after I merged it, with the Duke of Wellington's Regiment article. Please note I have also merged the 76th Regiment of Foot (Macdonald's Highlanders) with the 76th Regiment of Foot article so that will need you magic touch as well. :) Richard Harvey (talk) 18:47, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I have added tag. Thanks for letting me know. Keith D (talk) 20:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation about the sub-pages, Keith. So is that article actually over-long at 79,000 bytes, and what's the best way to deal with over-long articles in general? Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 21:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I would think it is getting to the size when a split is needed see WP:SIZE. The other way to a split is to use summary style as per Wikipedia:Summary style. Keith D (talk) 21:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind help.--Storye book (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Anne Bronte

A reviewer has just picked the article up!!--Harkey (talk) 18:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I have just spotted that they have sprayed it with {{Fact}} tags. Keith D (talk) 23:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

That's OK, I spent the night reading Brontë and hunting for the "facts". My eyeballs are now an unusual colour, but I found a lot of the info!!--Harkey (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I am vaguely concerned about some text that seems to appear in a lot of online articles. Chicken and egg situation- which came first- maybe?!!--Harkey (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The reviewer was not to happy with it and failed it outright - not what I was expecting. I was looking for some copyright on the site they quoted but could not find any and the pages above it would not load. Keith D (talk) 11:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I've ordered some library books about the Brontës, but they will take a while to come (if ever!). I think it needs to go on the back burner for now. I think the so called plagiarism clinched the failure. Pity I spotted it too late.--Harkey (talk) 11:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Co-ordinates

Hi, I wonder if the best place for the PL co-ordinates would be as part of the image description of the image on commons. On commons there is an infobox for co-ordinates. To find out more information, perhaps a reader is more likely to click on the image of the grave than to examine the page code. Snowman (talk) 15:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

A co-ordinate box on the image page would be a good thing, but I think the user added it to the article so that a marker is placed on the map when google earth is opened, I just added a title so that the marker is annotated. May be outputting the co-ordinates in the caption of the grave image on the PL page is better than in the title area where it does not make much sense. May be drop a note to the user who added the co-ordinates and see what they think. Keith D (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Map for Sykes Churches Trail

I have been playing with this in my sandbox. Have you any way of getting Fimber, Wetwang and Sledmere untangled? Please experiment!!--Harkey (talk) 16:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Could try reducing them each to an initial, piped, and adding a key in a map caption? PamD (talk) 16:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, thanks, neat idea, I will try that now.--Harkey (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I tried and got slightly better, but I think PamD's idea will probably work better as they are too close together. Keith D (talk) 17:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Done, any comments welcome!! BTW What happens when you "mouse over" on the initials on the map? On my browser (Firefox) I get the full name of the link.--Harkey (talk) 17:20, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I have tweaked them a bit. May be better to put the key in alphabetical order. I have no idea on the hover over as I have pop-ups on at the moment. Keith D (talk) 17:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Well that (making a table) should stop me getting up to mischief in Leeds this weekend!!!:-)--Harkey (talk) 19:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

or should that be City of Leeds? Keith D (talk) 19:51, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Last natter for tonight. Brain hurts!! Do you think this will do for theTable?--Harkey (talk) 21:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks OK, may be split name into name & location to get a better sort. Keith D (talk) 21:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

OK. Will do that--Harkey (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I was only thinking of using initials on the map for the ones closest together, not for the whole lot - but perhaps it's tidier that way. PamD (talk) 19:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Vernacular geography

I'd appreciate it if you would have a look at this article and think of any categories that it needs to be assigned to. I'll be back online on Sunday a.m. -- duty calls!!--Harkey (talk) 17:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Well I guess it will have to go under Category:Geography somewhere. Keith D (talk) 17:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Keith, I was in such a rush that the obvious just escaped me!!:>)--Harkey (talk) 21:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

East Riding III

What are your thoughts on the history section of the East Riding, please?--Harkey (talk) 18:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

On the new section I am curious about the north of Easington, apart from needing a dab, does this refer to the Out Newton at the start of the sentence. My guess is that it should read north of Lissett where the second 12 turbine wind farm is.

The history section appears to be rather thin after we moved most of it out into History of the East Riding of Yorkshire may be it needs to summarise things a little better.

May be a peer review would be appropriate to see what others think before going for GA and having to wait only to get thrown out. Keith D (talk) 18:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking that the history was thin and leaned a bit too much towards the administrative side. Not enough periods of history, Arras culture, Romans, etc. It means having to put a bit more "meat" into History of the East Riding of Yorkshire and then summarising the history here to fit, I think. I'll revisit it.

Sorry about the Easington bit, it got muddled with other stuff. I still have to get to the offshore turbines as well. It's funny, people love Skidby Windmill but hate wind turbines. Yet in the Louth Panoramio of 1844 there are windmills all over the place.--Harkey (talk) 19:31, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I have problems with the ones at Tickton as there is one turbine very close to the road on the bend and is rather distracting to those going north to Bridlington. I can foresee an accident if people are not conentrating and are distracted by the turbine. Keith D (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I got your message re November Newsletter. I have expanded the East Riding history section trying not to go into too much detail. It may need copyediting as I kept getting carried away with expanding and going back to cut chunks out! Please feel free to condense if you think it's too much (or let me know if you're a glutton for punishment and want more!!!).--Harkey (talk) 16:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I can't see the wood for the trees anymore on the East Riding article. It seems a bit of a compromise between the old article that was mostly about administration and the new text about the area. I feel as though I can see where it's been sewn together!! When you've had a look, let me know what you think and maybe we can put it in for a peer review just to get another opinion.

The popular pages list is fascinating and it does point the way to what is.... Well erm popular!! Maybe we should look again at some of our priorities and importance ratings. I know I started that conversation a month or two ago but I put it back in the cupboard when I realized that I might be standing on someone's pet corns before long.--Harkey (talk) 19:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I have had a look over the East Riding article and done a few tweaks and noted the following -

• The "Administrative history" last couple of sentences on parishes is unreferenced.
• The ""History" section - first couple of sentences unreferenced.
• "Geology" - may be an image showing the areas may be useful.
• "Geology" - the red-link Bridlington Bay - do you think this should just be redirected to Bridlington?
• "Landscape" - probably needs more wikilinks e.g. drumlin mounds.
• "Landscape" - Flood defences probably could do with an update as 2005 is a bit dated now.
• "Governance" - appears to be a discrepancy with the infobox as mentions 5 constituencies here but only 4 MPs in infobox.
• "Economy" - may be worth starting a stub for the red-link Hull and Humber Ports City Region.
• "Transport" - may be mention bus operators.
• "Public services" - may be should have a mention of Hornsea & Withernsea hospitals.

Though I would get some other eyes on it as it is becoming familiar and I have probably missed some glaring problems. Keith D (talk) 22:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all that. The familiarity was the problem that I was having with it!! I'll have a go at some of the other points later in the week. I was having a look at the Hull and Humber Ports website earlier today, it seems to follow the same sort of style as the Leeds City Region so I could create something. I think I'll stick around the East and North Ridings for a bit till the storms elsewhere die down. The game isn't worth the candle!!--Harkey (talk) 22:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

You're kidding?

The main article has now been moved to Catholic Church in the summer after a long-worked out consesus. There is a mesage here on the WikiProject page by Richard in August about bringing the articles into uniformity with consensus on CC. Can you move term back to reflect community CC consensus. - Yorkshirian (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I would expect use of WP:RM for all moves that are controversial and least some notification on the talk pages for any such moves not some talk on another page that people may not be looking at. Keith D (talk) 18:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The RM move was on CC, it was established by the community there after a long process that "Catholic" is the primarly useage and that minority groups who broke off shouldn't be able to impose a largely percieved derogatory phrase on the words largest Church. You really think setting up 40 or so "request moves" is nessasary when the issue has been resolved there already? That would take an age and I doubt many people even watch pages like "Catholicism in Estonia". - Yorkshirian (talk) 18:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

That may apply to that particular article but not for other articles. As they are all controversial then the correct procedure is to advertise the move and allow for the community to comment via WP:RM and leave it to the closing admin to do the moves. Keith D (talk) 18:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Sunderland and AWB

Hello Keith D,

I've just downloaded AWB, but it's my first time using it. I'm a little confused as to how to get going. Am I right that I need to do some programming (of sorts) to it first, to get going? As I proposed the changes to the articles I feel it's only right that I do my bit to clean up the mess! --Jza84 |  Talk  22:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I think I've figured it out! Sorry for the intrusion!--Jza84 |  Talk  22:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I do not think that there is any programming required to get it going, I got it ages ago but only use it occasionally. I think the configuration is set up the first time you use it now with the newer version. Start it up then click on file and pick login/profiles to login to wikipedia using your userid/password. Sometimes it hangs here if you do not use IE as your normal browser, if this happens try starting it before opening up any browser sessions. Keith D (talk) 22:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

November newsletter

I shall be away from 24th Oct for a week (Northumberland this time). Any odd jobs to do on the newsletter before I go?--Harkey (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I will be away sometime at end of month or start of November not sure when, I have not got round to starting the newsletter yet. May be you could put together a feature on the popular pages report. Keith D (talk) 19:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'll have a go at that. I'll also try to get the Sykes churches trail and the history section of the East Riding done. We can then ask for a peer review on the East Riding, if you think it's OK. That should bring it to about the beginning of November, when I'll be back to do the corrections etc.. I should be back by 1st November to get the paper lad out of bed, too!!--Harkey (talk) 19:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I have started to create a ward map for the East Riding so may be that can be worked in when it is done. Probably need to have some more wikilinks in the history section as a number of technical type terms that some will need help with. Not sure how long peer reviews are taking but may be a good idea to put one in before you go then can pick up on any comments when you get back. Probably the work here can be filtered down to the other area articles when we have got it to GA status such as Holderness, Vale of York, Yorkshire and the Humber etc. Keith D (talk) 19:45, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

SamckBot

You are quite right, although there are cases when that is unavoidable, this was not one of them, but was a minor bug. Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough 22:41 17 October 2009 (UTC).

automobile -> car

Hi, I note you've recently helped revert some moves from "car" to "automobile". If you have a moment, would you please consider moving Argyll (automobile) over the redirect-with-history at Argyll (car) for consistency with the other automobile/car articles (such as Princess (car)? This particular one is not one of the recent moves which are being moved back — in fact it's my fault it has the wrong name, since some time ago I was following the wrong precedent when I gave it the present name. – Kieran T ^(talk) 23:43, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

OK I have done this though looks like it has had a messy history of a merge at some point. Keith D (talk) 00:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Infinity Bridge

Hi Keith D.

A legal credit for the Infinity Bridge project has been agreed between Spence Associates, Expedition Engineering and the client.If any one of those parties is to refer to the design credits it is to be;

'The successful competition design was by Expedition Engineering and Spence Associates.

The subsequent design was led by Expedition assisted by Arup Materials, Balfour Beatty Regional Civil Engineering, Black & Veatch, Bridon, Cambridge University, Cleveland Bridge UK, Dorman Long Technology, Flint & Neill, Formfab, GCG, GERB, Imperial College, RWDI, Spence Associates, Speirs & Major, Stainton and William Cooke. White Young Green were Project Managers'.

For your further information, as confirmed in the credit, Spence Associates were contracted on the project up until tender stage and not just for the competition.

Regards

Mac.Wor —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mac.wor (talk • contribs) 12:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Have you any reliable sources for that information? Keith D (talk) 12:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20