User talk:Keith D/Archive 42

Archive 35Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45

10:32, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

re the RELC list at VPT: as you can see I am talking with Werieth at the botrequest page; you are welcome of course. This message is only to prevent people doing double work. -DePiep (talk) 17:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

13:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - November 2013

Delivered November 2013 by EdwardsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

William Vernon Harcourt (scientist)

I traced the bug to {{cite DNB}} and fixed it, so the editor field now works as expected with {{harv}}. Thanks for pointing it out. -- PBS (talk) 12:16, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

08:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Dates in Kinky Boots (musical)

Do you have a tool that expands dates from the ambiguous 11-8-2013 style to something like November 8, 2013? If so, could help expand the dates at Kinky Boots (musical)? Thanks for any assistance! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I have expanded dates to month first format which appears to be the most prominent date format in the article. Keith D (talk) 21:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Super! Thanks very much! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:32, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

  You might need this to help you block every IP he uses.. LOL JMHamo (talk) 01:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, looks like they have stopped for the moment - wonder how many reverts will happen overnight. Keith D (talk) 01:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

06:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

To village or not to village

Hi again Keith. Can you give advice here ? Settlements, however small, are written as villages if they have a church (extablished CofE ?) - I've osmosis[ed] this from watching your edits. However, a place could be so small that in itself it would, without a church, be considered a hamlet, but has a church that has been made redundant and therefore not now part of an ecclesiastic parish or diocese. Could such redundancy make a previous tiny village a hamlet ? Does the fact that a very small settlement is also a civil parish automatically covert a hamlet to a village ? Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Difficult area here. I would say that a place having a church, probably of any type, is clearly an indication of a village. I would think that once a village then it should remain a village even if the church is redundant. I would not have thought that having a civil parish named after it makes it a village. Try to use settlement if there is a problem of what to call it. Keith D (talk) 00:37, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that - from web searches on the topic, whether or not a settlement can be a village or a hamlet seems to be bit of a moveable feast. Your suggestion of 'settlement' where there could be some debate is sensible. If a village church has been demolished would a small settlement then become a hamlet ? - as you say - difficult area. This does cause a bit of a headache regarding which cat to add, as we can't add both. Acabashi (talk) 09:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
They all went in to the village category until someone decided we should have a hamlets category. I tend to leave them in the village one unless someone else moves them. Keith D (talk) 14:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Millennium Dome

Keith, I hardly need 'reliable' sources. It is as clear as the nose on my face that the design of the Millennium Dome was based on the EU flag. Perhaps *you* should investigate this matter? Meanwhile I suggest that the information that I have provided is included in the article. It is impolite of you to keep removing my addition. Any article that does not mention the fact that the design of the Dome was based on the EU flag is sadly deficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truebrit333 (talkcontribs) 11:30, 5 December 2013‎ (UTC)

You have to supply a source for such information for it to remain in the article, see WP:CITE. If you persist you are likely to be blocked. Keith D (talk) 12:04, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - December 2013

Delivered December 2013 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

08:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 14:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

08:24, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Premier league table template

Hi. You are one of the editors involved in the Premier league table template at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 121#Displaying a part of the table. The work is very close to the end and the template now looks like the one currently used at 2013–14 Premier League. I just wanted to see if you could take a look at Template:2013–14 Premier League table/sandbox and the result of the template that can be seen at User:Spudgfsh/sandbox. Please take a look at it and comment on the result. Then it is only to decide if we should highlight the team or not and then we should be ready to use it. Discussion about that on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Highlighting or bolding. Thank you!. QED237 (talk) 11:35, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Cold?

  Best wishes
for the holidays and 2014 from a warmer place than where you probably are ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:08, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

08:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Glad Tidings and all that ...

  FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:15, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

08:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

08:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Templates

Hello Keith. Advice please on these templates. I've been adding {{Use British English}} to some English place articles. The similar temp {{EngvarB}} is also available and appears to do the same thing although, from what I can glean, it provides some kind of device whereby other corrections can be made through the bowels of Wikipedia – too complicated for me to understand. I've brought up the use of the two with Ohconfucus [86], who adds 'EngvarB', and has been very helpful. I think I've noticed that you change 'EngvarB' to 'Use British English' at times. Though the temps 'Use dmy dates' and 'Use British English' at tops of edit windows do give the uninitiated clear advice, is there an advantage in adding 'EngvarB' as well to help with Ohconfucius's processing ? I have started adding both in some articles but don't want to go too far and give myself extra self-reverting work. Do you have a view on these templates ? Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 14:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

There should only be one of the Use xxx language templates in an article so that you know which variant to use. The {{engvar}} is a generic one and I usually replace it with a more specific one when I spot it, though leave for Irish and other articles where it could be contentious. Keith D (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I'll just use the {{Use British English}} in English place articles from now on. Acabashi (talk) 14:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Accessdates

There's no need to add accessdates to publications have have a publication date, and will not change eg accessdate: Template:Citation#cite_note-dates-1 Not required for web pages or linked documents that do not change; mainly for use of web pages that change frequently or have no publication date

That should included dated news items on the web, excluding breaking news and all dated published documents.

Please stop adding when unnecessary - they are unneeded and can be distracting.Prof.Haddock (talk) 17:01, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

(You also don't need an accessdate for documents from a dated archive - for obvious reasons).

Accessdates should be given for web documents so that you can find out when they were accessed and can track down when they do to dead links. You will find that they are required for getting articles to FA standard and so should be present in articles. They are part of the reference and not distracting, they should not be reemoved. Keith D (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

George Hussey Packe

Apologies for monopolising your time again. I've dropped a message on Lincs Talk, for a Talk page assessment for newish add George Hussey Packe. Robert appears to be taking a break so could you assess please and give the article a once-over to see if I've made any fluffs ? As you seem conversant with railway articles, does this one fall within any railway projects ? Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 22:46, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I have rated it as Low importance and C-class. Unsure of the importance level that Robert is using but cannot see it been higher that that. He also appears to go higher for the class rating that I would. On the article unsure on the UK in the lead may be it is OK for that time period but would check. Keith D (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I went UK because I'm supposing that this is the political manifestation defined in 1801 (when it added Ireland), but if you think English or British is better I will change it. Acabashi (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
I was just querying it, I do not know the answer here. Keith D (talk) 00:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

09:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

RFC: Month abbreviations

Hi Keith D! Your input at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RFC: Month abbreviations would be appreciated. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:55, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - January 2014

Delivered January 2014 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.


Gaping Gill

Hi, Keith D

You will have noticed that I have recently made a start on creating articles on the entrances of Gaping Gill (Bar Pot, Stream Passage Pot, Jib Tunnel, Disappointment Pot, and Rat Hole have been written so far). This was motivated by the fact that the Gaping Gill itself article is pretty dreadful, and I thought that the best way of getting it sorted was by hiving off its secondary entrances into separate articles, and taking on the Gaping Gill Main Shaft and the Gaping Gill System as one article at a later date. I have tried to make the articles I have written as definitive as possible (I was aiming for GA standard - i.e. full description and full history, all fully referenced).

I thank you for rating those articles. I have no arguments with the 'C' Class rating rating you have given, but I do not think the main Gaping Gill article, which has also been rated 'C' Class, is comparable with the standard of those articles. Gaping Gill one of the major cave systems in the UK which is world famous, and which has a history of exploration going back 170 years. It is a complex system over 16 kilometres (9.9 mi) long, with a geological history stretching over at least three glaciations. Compare, say Rat Hole with the Gaping Gill article and then consider that Rat Hole is simply an entrance into the Gaping Gill Main Chamber.

In my view, the Gaping Gill article merits no more than a Stub class. Langcliffe (talk) 08:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I had a look at the article, out of curiosity. It's certainly not a stub, though I wouldn't argue between "start" and "C" - but I was surprised to see it ranked as "Low" importance. As Langcliffe sets out above, it's nationally and internationally important. I'm not a caver (though I've been down it on the Bank Holiday winch), but I think it should be ranked higher. 85.211.32.181 (talk) 08:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
You may well be right about the Gaping Gill assessment, 85.211.32.181. The reason why I think that it merits no more than a 'Stub' class is that it consists of a random sequence of snippets about the system, without any context and without any clear idea of the relative importance of those facts. Moreover, some of the 'facts' are misleading - e.g. relating the volume of York Minster to that of the Main Chamber. It was always said that the two were similar, but the laser scanning technology demonstrated that York Minster is actually considerably larger. Langcliffe (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the work on the new articles. I have had another look and I can see that I should not have up-rated it to a C-class article, though I think there is more there than just a stub with the number of references, images and some structure so I have reverted to a Start-class article. At suggestion about importance I have changed this to a Mid-importance. More difficult to judge this as there is no guidance to go on from the caves project who do not appear to have any grading system at all. Keith D (talk) 12:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

10:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

National Westminster Bank

Hi. I wondered if you'd please care to add a comment at Talk:National Westminster Bank#Article Rename. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 15:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

09:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

How did you undo a whole bunch of edits in one fell swoop?

How did you revert three consecutive vandal edits in one stroke as you just did here? In such cases why do I have to use three consecutive undos? Contact Basemetal here 14:21, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

In that case I use the Rollback link as they are all by the same user. If they are by different editors or you do not have rollback then you can do the same thing by doing a compare versions from the history list and then using the undo. Keith D (talk) 14:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2014

Delivered February 2014 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.


08:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

09:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Suth anston listed at Redirects for discussion

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Suth anston. Since you had some involvement with the Suth anston redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 10:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Lawence Sheriff School

You object to the Lawrence Sheriff Postings. What is the objection? I can email you the data as evidence, including emails and the letter from DfE and the Local Government Ombudsman. Why do you keep removing facts which are clear important issues? The public have a right to know facts. This is also discussed on 11plus.eu and the links are genuine. Evidence is available. LawrenceSheriff (talk) 13:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry if I undid some of your work. I am new to Wiki. I am not sure if I am "Talking" to you in the correct manner. No, there is not a war. Everything is factual. I provided links to articles and can even email you the DfE letter and the LGO correspondence. These are purely facts I also added the school was 7th in GCSE tables (not a bad thing) and also pointed out 25% did not achieve the EB (fact). The Outstanding OFSTED report is very old - over 6 years old and as such is not recent. It should really be removed. OFSTED also visited the school due to bullying and the police visiting the school many times - I did not post this. LawrenceSheriff (talk) 13:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Recurring problem at Hetherington

Hello, Keith D! Last summer you semi-protected Hetherington for three months because of repeated, unsourced, & undiscussed changes by IPs. (AGF I wouldn’t go so far as to call it vandalism, as it seems the subject is now a mostly Scots & Irish surname, despite its English origin. But that’s neither here nor there, considering that sourced content is being removed in favour of personal anecdotes.) Please have a look at the history and see if you think the situation warrants renewed protection for the article. If you’d rather I went to RfPP, that’s fine; I just thought I’d contact you first.—Odysseus1479 05:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, I am happy to semi-protect again as looks like nothing productive since November. Things seem to have escalated since I last reverted at end of January. Keith D (talk) 12:18, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

08:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

10:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

David Cameron.

Keith, I wonder if you can give your unbiased opinion on the latest encyclopedic efforts by Special:Contributions/193.63.173.254 on Cameron & other pages? Regards JRPG (talk) 17:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

All look like vandalism and worthy of another block. Before a block I would suggest that you issue them with a warning and see if that stops their activity. Keith D (talk) 18:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi Keith, I think the parameters are "deprecated" rather than "depreciated": the latter is what happens to savings etc! PamD 18:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Rather too late after a few hundred articles, hopefully I can get it right for future ones though the incorrect one is still in the browser list. Keith D (talk) 19:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - March 2014

Delivered March 2014 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

09:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Showroom Cinema, Sheffield

Hello

i saw that you had been on the showroom site and edited a bit of it. I am editing that page currently for my University course and i was wondering if you have time you could go look at it and see if there's anything that you believe needs changing about it. Liamparlett (talk) 09:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, the references need to give more detail such as the publisher, date of publication and an access date. Some of the references are duplicates and should be combined using <ref name="ref1">....</ref> for the first occurrence and then just use <ref name="ref1"/> for subsequent usages.
Unsure about the context tag that someone has added as looks OK, though may be it just applies to the list which could do with some introductory text. The list tag could be dealt with either by converting the list to a table or by changing it to prose.
Hope this helps. Keith D (talk) 12:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Coventry

WikiProject status guidelines state that a project is inactive if there has been no significant edits to the main page in at least 4 months and, in the case of this project, it's been a year. But I wish you good luck in reviving it (although it could get tagged again in the future). Liz Read! Talk! 17:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

There may not be edits to the main page but there is still tagging etc going on. Keith D (talk) 17:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Archive 35Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45