User talk:Keith D/Archive 20

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

→

Archive 25

Gaping Gill

Keith - I would be grateful if you would give a second opinion on the new link that has been added to Gaping Gill. It seems to be a vanity link, with no obvious benefit to the article so I removed it. It was rapidly reinstated, but I have no wish to involved in a ping pong exercise. --Langcliffe (talk) 13:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Rather thin on the ground on anything useful, I would remove it, though may be difficult, without protection, to keep it off as the link was added then restored by different IPs. Keith D (talk) 13:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I've done that, and invited the editor to enter into discussion about the link. --Langcliffe (talk) 13:30, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

HELP!! I now seem to be in an edit war! I have reverted the link four times. I have investigated further, and it definitely is a vanity link for a web site that says nowt. It even claims to be the Gaping Gill forum, but has no members and no entries! I'm quite happy to carry on undoing, but I wanted you to be aware of the situation.

On a somewhat tangential subject, I have reverted Ingleborough Cave back to more-or-less how it was before a young lad modified it following a school trip to the cave. I didn't do it before, as I didn't want to upset him... --Langcliffe (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I had just noted the link and was about to remove it when I realised you had reverted it out again. I was thinking about protecting the page to get them to talk about the link on the talk page as that may be the only way forward. Keith D (talk) 18:25, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

UK Roads

I am leaving you this message as I have deduced that you make semi-regular edits to UK road related articles. As the UK Roads WikiProject is largely inactive these days, it is necessary to contact editors individually.

There is currently a discussion ongoing at Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style (exit lists)#United Kingdom regarding junction lists used in UK road articles. Your input in the discussion would be welcome. Jeni ^(talk) 02:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Template:RailGauge

Keith, No problem. when you get back to it I'll see the "red links" disappear. Just let me know anyway. Peter Horn User talk 17:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Keith, I see that your PC appears to be still "on leave". Tell me about it, mine was out of order for a while so I did my Wiki editing from PCs in a nearby public library. Cheers, Peter Horn User talk 21:15, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The red links are still there, see my post below. Peter Horn User talk 02:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I am nibbling away at it a few at a time, though I will be away again next week. I think the template is getting too large as it takes a time to save it back to the server following a change, may break with all the additions at some point. Keith D (talk) 11:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

You might do them in your sandbox, and when they are all done, copy and paste them into the template.But that may not be any faster. Peter Horn User talk 14:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Warning posted

Hi Keith, thanks for the warning. You're probably not aware of the Wikipedia Talk:British Isles Terminology task force/Specific Examples page. I reverted MidnightBlueMan on a number of pages where he reverted the term with no reason other than a flimsy one of "reverted a blocked user". As it turns out, MBM has breached 3RR and I've reported this. The SE page is where we try to discuss these changes in advance, and we were recently trying to adhere to 1RR. Unfortunately, this only works with the buy-in of all editors, and sadly an admin refused to enforce it recently resulting in a number of editors ... taking advantage. If you'd like to contribute to the page (and if you have the time), your contributions would be welcomed, and it might help stave off these nationalistic edit wars in the future. Thank you. --HighKing (talk) 23:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I cannot see the problem with the Canterbury–York dispute article as the sentence is apparently referenced to a book so the terminology used in the book should be used regardless of any wikirules. Unfortunately there is no online book so I could not check which, if either, of the texts is used. Keith D (talk) 23:53, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Ya know something, that's now 2 editors (MidnighBlueMan & HighKing), who've been caught socking around the 'British Isles' usage stuff. The editors who are fighting the most over that topic, have developed an obession with it. The time is coming where they'll have to be banned from that topic. GoodDay (talk) 14:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Just for the record, I was not "caught socking". A CU cleared me. I don't sock. --HighKing (talk) 22:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I did add a note to the incident and Ryan has extended the block that they had already imposed. Keith D (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Easington, East Riding of Yorkshire

Hi Keith - it's confusing, isn't it, when these lost settlements are often not acknowledged in articles. But it was the right Easington; I've added some info and an online ref to that article. I'm glad you drew my attention to it, as in the process I found we had articles for Ravenser Odd and Dunwich.--Storye book (talk) 18:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The list indicates the Easington is for an entry in the Forest of Bowland which is in North Yorkshire and for which we do not have an article, the list has no entry for the East Riding village. I edited the template dab but looks like we need a new dab for it at some point and an East Riding entry. There is also the Ravenspurn article which should be in the list. Keith D (talk) 19:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that: I've done Ravenspurn. Easington is a puzzle as it says it's in Lancashire in the Bowland article which you have linked. I'll leave that one to you. Thanks for all the help!--Storye book (talk) 23:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks like it was historically in the West Riding of Yorkshire, but is now a civil parish in Lancashire. Keith D (talk) 23:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Great Ayton

Keith I have recently looked at Mike Newton's websites about Great Ayton, and I also contacted him. I am sure these sites aren't at all commercial - no money changes hands. I agree with you they are pretty professional but thats no reason for not allowing a link. I do think they show a lot of interesting stuff about the village. Dano'sullivan (talk) 12:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

See my response at Talk:Great_Ayton#External_links - they have no place on Wikipedia. --Simple Bob (talk) 12:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Bridge

(Yes I'm in Hull) I'll bear it in mind (not a very good camera - but should be ok for small images) - To be honest I think the best bits of the construction I may have already missed the opportunity to photograph - more than 1 (or 2) month(s) ago they were pile driving using a floating construction platform - (looked like a red tennis court floating in the middle of the river) - impressive and odd - as I understand it the bridge is either being assembled or on it's way from barnsley in bits. I'll try to get down there in the next few days and take some photographs. Shortfatlad (talk) 20:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I may get a completed one later in the year. Keith D (talk) 20:25, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Source Radio

Please refer to my email address as station manager before amending contributions by myself on this page Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsehat (talk • contribs) 13:48, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

This is a wiki, anybody can amend pages - there is no need to refer to any one else. Especially as the edits you made violate our Biography of Living Persons policy. Thank you. Keith D (talk) 13:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Keith D, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.67.97.1 (talk) 14:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I have reverted out your changes again as you appear to have deleted a significant amount of sourced material. Keith D (talk) 19:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The information is mostly out of date, im trying to update this but it repeatedly gets reverted, all i am doing is removing non members and now irrelevent information —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsehat (talk • contribs) 22:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Where is your WP:RS for the changes. Keith D (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The current list of staff is not online, if it helps at all i can email you/anyone to confirm my position which should hopefully help prove the information is correct —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsehat (talk • contribs) 22:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:RS requires the information to be in published sources not connected to the organisation in question. Keith D (talk) 22:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

We are talking about random students, thats not going to be possible for the present "staff" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsehat (talk • contribs) 22:52, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Keith - the user "Arsehat" is trying to conduct a smear campaign against me, hence such gems as allegations I had intercourse with goats and got sacked from organisations where that was definitely not the case. Although I note you quickly reverted those edits, I have noted them myself and am at this time considering my posistion. For the time being I've flagged the article as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.154.147 (talk) 00:45, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I have restored the article as the current content is fine, as far as I can see. I have deleted the offending edit from the article history. Keith D (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Keith. Obviously I have my own record of those comments and will be inviting the organisation's internal regulatory body to take action before it has to become a legal issue, but I have no intention of going after Wikipedia if such action is necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.154.147 (talk) 01:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Bramhope

Hi Keith D. Please could you kindly give advice on the location grid section of Bramhope. Yesterday an unregistered user IP 80.2.68.243 replaced the existing eight-part location grid with a new four-part one which didn't match the locations which I could see on the Google Earth map. I reverted the edit. The user now seems to be trying to replace the location grid with an inferior four-part grid (i.e. showing only locations N, S. E. and W of Bramhope). This makes life difficult for the user, as e.g. they only have east and west to play with, and have put in Yeadon and Harewood which are south-west (not west) and north-east (not east) of Bramhope.

What's the best policy? Leave them to it and put the original grid back when they get bored and leave? Or keep reverting their edits and risk getting involved in an edit war? The trouble is, if you click on their IP, you'll see that during yesterday and today they have done this on dozens of articles on Yorkshire localities, and they are consistently making the same mistake. They started with Meanwood, and their result is similarly inaccurate, if you compare it with Google maps. I think they are relying on their own memory of going up and down or left and right on roads.--Storye book (talk) 18:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I had noticed the IP modifying the location grids in various articles, but I had not investigated further as I made the assumption that they knew what they were doing. Though I did correct the heading to lower-case the "g" on a few articles, they got the message from another user on their talk page and started doing it right. Having a look at Bramhope 3 of the entries they have used need a dab and the initial version looks more accurate to the map, though Bradford in SW seems wrong to my quick look. I would guess that all of the changes need to be checked out and reverted if they are wrong. I must say that I am not really a fan of the box as it is difficult to visualise - see discussion Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/Archive 10#Geographic Location box. If they are to stay then the 8 point version needs to be used and to be fairly accurate. May be drop them a note on their talk page as seem to be a static IP who only edits Leeds area articles. Keith D (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Keith D. I'll have a go, and see how far I can get without hassle, although their only response to me so far has been to revert my edit without comment. This is going to be a very long job, as they have already done a few dozen articles in two days.--Storye book (talk) 21:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Well I tried.--Storye book (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, we will see what happens, when they reappear again. Keith D (talk) 21:28, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I have to say most of the location grids I have seen on the Yorkshire pages have had only 4 points, whereas I have mostly seem 8 points elsewhere. Perhaps the editor was only copying what s/he had seen. I however think 8 points is preferable and will change them on pages I have edited.--J3Mrs (talk) 23:58, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

One of the reasons why most of the location grids you have seen on Yorks pages are 4-pointers could be because the unregistered user IP 80.2.68.243 has put them there.--Storye book (talk) 12:03, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I have just done some investigation and the old grid box that was on these articles using {{NSEW}} which gave a boxed appearance, like this, was changed to use the {{Geographic location}} template on 9 March 2010. It could be the change in appearance that has prompted the IP to do these changes. Keith D (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The IP has done a huge number of edits today, and appears not to have a clue about disambiguating links - they have repeatedly linked to Adel, Woodhouse etc, even where the previous location grid on the page linked correctly to disambiguated pages. What a waste of effort. I've left a note on their page - if they continue to do this, it will be a species of vandalism. PamD (talk) 23:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The same IP blanked a revision by administrator Materialscientist on Bramhope yesterday. Is there no end to this?--Storye book (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

S/he has now reverted my corrections to Headingley and presumably to many other pages - I've made a formal {{uw-vandal2}} and hope that other people will add appropriate higher tags if this person continues their disruptive editing. It looks as if they are just automatically replacing any edited version of a location grid by their own - even where as in this case it's not a disagreement over placenames but a disambiguation or 3 of links. Keith, can you do anything faster as an admin, to stop this damaging editing? PamD (talk) 23:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want speed, PamD, Keith D is on holiday until 11 April (see banner above). I suggest that if you want action before Keith D returns that you - and anyone else who is concerned - contact User:Materialscientist, who is already aware of this IP. Alternatively User:Excirial is also good at dealing with this sort of situation.--Storye book (talk) 09:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note looks like some action has taken place as another warning was issued to the user. Though still looks like they are the last editor on a number of articles, someone who knows the area needs to go through and validate there edits on these. I cannot really help on the geography here without a lot of work with the maps. Keith D (talk) 18:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Undenting for clarity There's a new user User:Pixiemoo with a familiar editing style - has just gone through a lot of our location grids unpiping links which need to be piped (as in this edit to Headingley. PamD (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Missed this, for some reason it did not put up the banner, I have already put a note on the Yorkshire project page, unsure where to go from here, we could block the new registered user but do not think that is going to solve the problem. Keith D (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't panic

Hi Keith D. Thought I'd better just let you know about my latest seven DYK noms here, so that you know what's happening. It involves a few Yorks articles, but it's all harmless and I'll remove the temporary additions in due course. If I add any more to the list, I'll keep you informed.--Storye book (talk) 21:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, good to have some 1 April entries, there was a couple of Yorkshire ones last year. Keith D (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

York

hi keith, thanks for your comment about my changes to the York page. I am happy to put in sources for my changes, but am not sure what would be appropriate. Both clubs have webpages, but one can never be certain that they are kept up to date or in situ. what would you reccommend? Cheers, Antiteapot (talk) 12:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I would probably just go for the main page of the clubs as that is probably the best we have on them. The problem with all websites is that they move or change over time so all our links have the same difficulty, just need to keep an eye out for dead links when they occur. Thanks Keith D (talk) 16:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - April 2010

Delivered April 2010 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 regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 09:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Scale Lane Bridge, Hull

As requested ... see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Scale_Lane_Bridge,_Kingston_upon_Hull

The foundations seem finished. (not sure about the other bank - didn't see any evidence of work) - I forgot the sun rises in the east, and went out at the wrong time of day - hence the images are a bit overcast.Shortfatlad (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the photos. Will have to see how it progresses over the rest of the year. Keith D (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

References after commas

Hello Keith. I see you do a lot of automated changes using AWB and notice one of the changes you make is to move the references tag to after a comma rather than before (e.g. [1]. Is there wiki guidance (or other sources) confirming this is the correct method? Regards. Eldumpo (talk) 08:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The manual of style section Punctuation and inline citations gives details of where reference tags should be placed. Keith D (talk) 18:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the useful section link. Eldumpo (talk) 21:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback}} Kudpung (talk) 12:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 6c5e494680ee96928f590ffa95083c36

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Longcroft School and Performing Arts College

Thanks for your help with recent changes patrol and dealing with vandalism. I wanted to point out that your recent revert to this page inadvertently restored libellous and defamatory material to the page. Please take extra care when using rollback to ensure that inappropriate material is not restored. Stifle (talk) 15:53, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out, I should have been more careful with the reversion. Keith D (talk) 15:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback}} Kudpung (talk) 20:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

RfC draft

Keith, I wonder if I could ask your opinion on this RfC draft. Although I am deeply concerned with, and about the topic for debate, I would like the proposal to sound as clear and as neutral as possible and I want to be sure that I have achieved this before I post it. On the other hand, if you don't wish to comment on its wording, that's also fine by me.--Kudpung (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Not something that I understand but reading it the following need looking at.

1. The end of the second sentence appear to be missing some text as it does not read right.
2. What is RP in the italic sentence under 'the statement' and used several times after that?
3. In the Proposal it says 'see list below' but there is nothing below it. I assume it means above.

Keith D (talk) 16:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

It's about a possible disparity between the IPA pronunciation of British places (as used in the Wikipedia) vs. the actual voiced pronunciation as used throughout the UK, Europe, and in many regions abroad. A decision here would have site-wide implications. 1. Second sentence used a wrong pronoun. 2. RP is Received pronunciation - link now provided - RP is a neutral form of British English pronunciation that is spoken and/or understood by the vast majority of British people today. 3. The order of sections had already been changed - 'below' is correct. Thanks for your input - much appreciated.--Kudpung (talk) 18:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Just chipping in here: is an RfC which instructs people to read 24 previous discussions actually going to attract any new and useful participants to the discussion? I wonder how many people will actually read all those 24. Might it be better to try to summarise the previous discussions? PamD (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Old Photos

Keith - I wondered if you would be able to help. The Alkborough History society have collected a significant number of very old photos of the village. The people who took the photos are either dead, or unidentifiable (and probably both in 99% of cases!) We would like to put them on Wikimedia, but none of the licence conditions seem to fit the bill. For a few, the photographer is alive, and happy for the photos to be placed on their behalf (but have no computer skills of their own), but Wikimedia doesn't seem to allow for that either. Any advice gratefully received. Sammy_r (talk) 09:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Not really up on copyright issues, but it looks like they should now be in the public domain and can be used. It is probably best to ask the question of those in the know on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions as they should be able to give you the correct answer to your question. Keith D (talk) 10:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

How is your PC??

Hello Keith, I take it that you PC is still on the fritz. Peter Horn User talk 02:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It is better that it was I had to ditch the AV software to get it going again. Keith D (talk) 11:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Advertising

Hi Keith, I'm just wondering if this image File:Kays.gif would fall under the criteria for advertising and require deleting? Richard Harvey (talk) 08:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

As the company is, according to its article, defunct I cannot see the problem. Though the website still appears to be active with a different logo. Needs some further investigation/updating. Keith D (talk) 08:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Date to change a team's league?

Hi Keith, I just made this revert on the Hull City article as I could swear that I saw you make a similar revert a few days ago with the edit summary that we change the date of a team's league on 31 July when promoted or relegated; however, I've looked through the article's history page and can't now for the life of me find that revert. Can you point me to the guidance on that? Thanks much. Doonhamer (talk) 19:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi again, I see now that your revert was on the Kingston upon Hull article, not the Tigers article. Still, is there guidance for the date of the change? Doonhamer (talk) 20:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for delay in responding I have been away for the week. Cannot put finger on specific guidance, but in previous years the changes are made after the official last day of the season. There is usually a lot of reverting as people try to update early but the changes should not be made before 1st July which is when the season ends and the new season starts. I was a month out with my previous comment looking at this. Keith D (talk) 19:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Keith, hope you enjoyed the time away. I opened a discussion here about the matter a day or so ago, though there's been zero response so far. I was unaware of the archived discussion at the link you provide though, so perhaps I/we/whoever has an interest can standardise that in the club infobox tempate? Northumbrian (talk) 20:31, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I enjoyed time away though the weather was not too great, well it was typical Yorkshire weather! Would be good idea to have it noted down so that others know where to point people to. Probably a note on the template documentation about the start/end date for English clubs would be a start.

By the way welcome back, just spotted that you have changed username since the start of the tread. Keith D (talk) 20:54, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Keith, nice to be back. Work/life situation made it difficult to contribute as much as I'd have liked to, though I did keep up a low level. I hope to be able to contribute more now. And the new username is a better fit to my primary interests here at Wikipedia.

I've put this up on the Hull City talk page, referring to the recommendation on the club infobox talk page that we discussed. Please feel free to add/comment. Northumbrian (talk) 22:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I have just corrected the date there in an earlier comment I made. It will take me a while to catch up on changes to the articles. Keith D (talk) 22:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Very good, I noted the date change everywhere this discussion's taking place. Not much on the Hull City and Kingston upon Hull articles of note, mostly reverting Championship > Premiership for the Tigers in both places. Northumbrian (talk) 23:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The KC Stadium article needs some work, if you are interested. The new KC website breaks the references and I could not locate replacements on the new site just before I when away. The one page I located, for the stats, seems to have a different ground capacity than the previous version so unsure what is going on there, do not think the capacity has altered. Keith D (talk) 23:16, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll be happy to take a look in the next few days. Northumbrian (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Hull City A.F.C. : Status of Brown and Dowie: Hi Keith, would you mind taking a look and chiming in on who's who? I'm inclined to match what the official website states, but Pippin has been changing the manager and managing consultant in accordance with an article in the Hull Daily Mail. I don't want to revert war so I thought I'd seek more input. I've also asked MattyTheWhite to weigh in. Thanks, Northumbrian (talk) 20:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I would probably go with the Hull City web site as Brown is still on gardening leave and as far as I know Dowie has a contract until next weekend. There are rumours that they will go without a manager for 2 months and Dowie has offered to stay unpaid for 2 months if he gets the job for next season. (I am still in catch-up mode just got to election day and the number of problems that need fixing is growing) Keith D (talk) 21:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ouch, I can imagine it's a headache for you at the moment! I've brought the matter to the article's talk page; if you like, please feel free to chime in when you find a moment. Northumbrian (talk) 23:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

End of football season, general election & local elections have rather inflated the number of changes. Keith D (talk) 23:28, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - May 2010

Delivered May 2010 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 regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 07:11, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hull City A.F.C season 2009-10

why have you included the oppoistion goalscorers in Hull City's season? They are not revelant to the page. 82.37.11.194 (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

It is best and clearer to know all of the goal scorers in a match not just the ones for a specific team, it also gives you the time/type of goal and so gives you a time line of the match. Keith D (talk) 19:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't agree with it, why include goalscorers which r not hull city goalscorers in a hull city page?82.37.11.194 (talk) 19:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

It would be like having a report on a match which only mentioned Hull City players doing something and nothing by the opposition. A match is played by two teams and you report on both teams in the match. I was thinking of using the templates (See example at 2009–10 Coventry City F.C. season) rather than the table and they give even more detail of each match as we are currently missing things such as cards and referees for the matches.

Actually that's a better compromise, neatly arranged and everything, if u want 2 do that mate, it will be greatly recieved by me, I have no problem with that, I personally think that will make the article better.82.37.11.194 (talk) 22:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I may get round to it sometime but donot hold your breath as too much other changes in the pipeline at the moment. Keith D (talk) 17:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Message

i hate you keith why are you so mean to me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan keller (talk • contribs) 14:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

That is your prerogative. I have not picked on you in particular just that you have vandalised an article twice that I have on my watchlist, and vandalised another that I spotted while warning you for your first action. You are heading for a block if you continue to vandalise articles. If you make constructive edits to articles then all will be fine. Keith D (talk) 17:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Nice one...

Hi Keith, cheers for your revert on the Lee Strafford article. By the way, the previous "i hate you keith" message above kinda made me laugh. I haven't said that sort of thing since I was 13! Anyway, fella, have a nice evening. Jared Preston (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Image Dispute on AG'Bell page

Hello Keith,

I have had an image repeatedly removed by a new user (gold coast surf) on the 'Alexander Graham Bell' page who has accused me of "bias" for including a "disproportionate" amount of "national imagery" on that page. I have included two images that happen to be from the U.S. This is the image in dispute. It compliments a drawing of Bell's telephone schematic drawing. According to 'gold coast surfer' this amounts to a WP:NPOV violation. Further, when I included a 'Neutrality Disputed' tag on the page he removed that also.

This is the message I left for 'gold coast surf' on the AG'Bell discussion page:

---

(To user: gold coast surf:) -- Bulk of Wiki' articles contain "disproportionate national imagery"...esp history. All articles made with some bias. Please show how inclusion of only two US images 'expresses' this bias. You have yet to do this. Only claims. Does inclusion of a painting of George Washington express bias on the G.W. page? There are SEVEN 'national' paintings of Washington there. Are these paintings in violation of WP:NPOV?? Using your yard stick, most of the Wiki' articles and/or images would have to be deleted. Also, please do not remove the 'neutrality of this article is disputed', tag again until issue is resolved. Removal a -clear- violation.

---

I have attempted to restore the image about three times and he continues to remove it, along with neutrality disputed tag. Need help in resolving this issue. GWillHickers (talk) 10:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I warned both parties about the three revert rule. Thank you for attempting to open dialogue on the article talk page, I hope the other party comes to the table and does not continue to edit war over this. Though I note he has already approached another admin with a message on User talk:LessHeard vanU. Keith D (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback}} Kudpung (talk) 11:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback}} Kudpung (talk) 23:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Arthur Bell Nicholls

Hi Keith, I've started working on a draft page for Arthur Bell Nicholls. I notice however that a previous article about him was deleted. Could you possibly userfy it for me or turn up the AfD debate so that we can see why it was deleted and if any of the content can be salvaged? --Kudpung (talk) 01:52, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Not really any use there were 2 edits to the page the second adding {{db-person}} and it was deleted under speedy A7. The only text of the article was -

A clergyman of the Anglican church, he was husband of one of the Bronte sisters, and was parson of St Pauls Church of Ireland parish in Banagher, Co. Offaly.

Keith D (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Keith, Assistance required for Alexander Graham Bell article

Hi keith, you messaged me previously on this and i'd be grateful if you could assist in the speedy resolution on THIS page. The user Gwillhickers has not only consistently breached two wikipedia policies namely WP:NPOV and WP:MOS for images, but he is now stating falsehoods and making false accusations simply because he clearly hasn't read the comments. I advocated neutrality throughout. He falsely claimed that if it was a Scotland or Canada image (and not a US) that i wouldn't have removed it had it been placed in the wrong section, so i stated in my last comment,

As Bzuk has stated the user GWillhickers has to end this sniping against everyone and cease. Also GWillhickers needs to read the comments again because the user is repeatedly stating falsehoods and making false accusations. I shall copy and paste two sentences of my third comment,

Gwillhickers, retaining proportionality (to meet WP:NPOV) is one aspect, but its also the timeline and image relevance to the text (to meet WP:MOS). The Royal Bank of Scotland commemoration for his 150 year anniversary is a good one, it would be ideal to add to the commemoration section but its not THAT necessry as it looks ok.

If someone uploaded an image of the 1997 Royal Bank of Scotland Banknote that commemorates the 150th anniversary of the birth of Bell and placed it next to the section of his birth, i would remove it and place it in the commemoration section in legacy and honors (if the similar image wasn't already there). I have repeatedly stated commemoration section throughout if there was a commemorative Scotland image uploaded. I maintain neutrality whether its Scotland, US or Canada..that has been my argument from the start. This tirade against users has to end.

That was my last comment and i really cannot take anymore of this Keith. I genuinely do feel mentally drained over this. Other users have also called for an end to Gwillhickers tirade, its imperative that this ceases. Thankyou.Gold coast surf (talk) 03:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

You are going to have to wait on this one and go though the process as the other user has requested formal Mediation on this and has attempted to file a case for the mediation committee on this. You are going to have to chill on this and not get too worked up as with all things Wiki it can take time. Keith D (talk) 19:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I also note that you appear to be doing everything possible to inflame the situation by use of such words as FALSEHOODS and FALSE accusations and contacting several people over the dispute. Keith D (talk) 21:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Keith i contacted another user as i'm aware Admins are busy, and some have more time to deal with a situation. Regards the block capitals i was refuting a false accusation that he has made, which had he read the comments he would have seen, its now standard lowercase text.Gold coast surf (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC).

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

→

Archive 25