User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 1

GWR 378 Class

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of GWR 378 Class, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.reachinformation.com/define/GWR_378_Class.aspx.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Gotta love that bot sometimes... – iridescent 13:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes. It's utter b*ll*cks that I'd rip off another website. It's them ripping us off, and not giving due credit to WikiMedia Foundation, Wikipedia or even me. Somebody's removed the {{csb-pageincludes}} though; if it hadn't gone by 21:05 (UST) tonight I'd have removed it myself and to heck with the quincequonces. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Phew!

Right now, I never want to hear the words "Duke of Buckingham" again. Hopefully, that's the set complete. To think, this originally only started as a side-track from St. Mary's Church, Chesham… – iridescent 19:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

How about "and Chandos"? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I could do without "also known as Earl Temple of Stowe", too. – iridescent 20:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Class 33

There were also links coming from KA and KB ? Maybe you have the answer to this mystery for me also?

Also could you put some explanation somewhere about the D15 thing (on the main page, or maybe British Rail locomotive and multiple unit numbering and classification) - I didn't find anything there? (ok a very small mention well hidden).

Maybe dates for the years the locos carried the numbers could be added?

As for Class 34, my opinion is that if reliably referencable then it's valid to mention it, but if no locomotive ever carried the number then it doesn't really fit in the template.. An extension to List of British Rail unbuilt locomotive classes or similar would seem to be the place to mention it ("List of BR unused TOPS numbers" as a title?) . Up to you.Sf5xeplus (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

KA & KB are Southern Region pre-TOPS classifications for what latterly became Classes 33/0 and 33/1, just as HA, JA & JB were the SR classifications for what latterly became Classes 71, 73/0 and 73/1 - see Southern Electric Group - SR/BR(S) & TOPS Classes Conversion Tables. Like the E&NER codes, they were never borne by the actual locomotives, but were used on internal documentation; and also like the E&NER codes they crept into common usage because it was easier to say "We need a KB" than to say "We need a Birmingham RCW Type 3 with narrow body". Many SR people still use these codes in preference to TOPS.

Again, don't confuse TOPS classification with TOPS numbering. TOPS classifications (such as 33 and 34) were first drafted in 1967, and formally introduced round about the end of steam (circa August 1968), and, as with the existing regional systems, were mainly used on documents. TOPS numbers (such as 33 001 etc.) were allocated in late 1972 and began to be applied to the actual locos from early 1973. Since by August 1969, the erstwhile Class 34 had become Class 33/2, and the numbers allotted in late 1972 were linked to the classification by the first two digits, no locomotive would ever have been numbered 34 001 or similar. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Spot the Hush Hush

That's excellent to know, but how can we tell?

The source (gradually onto Commons) is a book of broad social history - about 300 pages (unnumbered, which is annoying) and 1000 photos from 1914-1938. There's some really obscure and useful stuff in here, even though the quality isn't great. I'm still searching for representative pictures of 10,000 that are copyright acceptable though. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Deduction. The right hand loco clearly has no nameplate, and no. 10000 was never named. Even after enlarging the photo, it's difficult to tell whether the left-hand loco has a nameplate or not, but enlargement shows that the middle three have partial names GOLDEN SHU, EMPIRE O and DEN EAG in that order. The description on the Commons page says "Dominion of New Zealand, Golden Shuttle, Empire of India, Golden Eagle and Nº 10,000" - the second to fourth names clearly correspond to the visible lettering on the middle three locos. Since these are in the same order, it's reasonable to assume that the left-hand loco is the first one listed, Dominion of New Zealand, so by elimination, the right-hand one must be 10000. Coming back to the r/h loco having no nameplate: only four A4s ran without nameplates - these were nos. 2509-12 from new (1935) until repainted in blue livery (Nov 1937-Aug 1938), but none of these were Dominion of New Zealand - they all had "Silver" in their names. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I'd rather suspected the caption might simply be in their order, but I was wondering if you knew something subtle about the shape of 10,000's chimney or somesuch. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

There are subtle differences, but are difficult to spot without actually standing alongside with a measuring tape. The bogie wheelbase of the W1 (6'6") is 3 inches longer than the A4 bogie (6'3"). Like the A4, the cylinders are not central between the bogie wheels, but slightly to the rear; it seems that the distance from cylinder to rear bogie wheel is the same in both classes, so on the W1 the front bogie wheel is 3" further forward relative to the cyls, with the combined result that: the buffers are correspondingly further from the cylinders; the access panel forward of the cyls is similarly 3" longer; and the hole in that panel in which to put the crank for opening the smokebox door cover is also 3" further from the cyls.

Also, see

• Boddy, M.G.; Brown, W.A.; Hennigan, W.; Hoole, Ken; Neve, E.; Yeadon, W.B.; Fry, E.V.; Jackson, D.; Manners, F. (1984). Fry, E.V. (ed.). Locomotives of the L.N.E.R., part 6C: Tender Engines - Classes Q1 to Y10. Kenilworth: RCTS. p.155 & fig. 132. ISBN 0 901115 55 X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

where we find that there is a subtle bulge on the side of the cylinders (no more than +21⁄32 of an inch), which is not found with the A4. However, if you know exactly what to look for, it does reflect light slightly differently, provided that the angle of incident light is right, which in this case it fortunately is. On the right-hand loco on the photo, locate the cylinder side panelling. At front and rear edges of this there is a vertical double row of rivet heads; look at the one at the rear of the cylinders. Counting the ones which form part of the top edge of the valance as the first pair, then between the seventh and eighth pairs down the cylinder side is lighter in colour. This is the upper surface of the bulge concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but are you sure? 8-) Andy Dingley (talk) 13:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Sue Perkins link

Hi. The original link (http://www.lgso.org.uk/index.htm) gives a 404 error, but the amended URL (http://www.lgso.org.uk/) works for me, so why do you say it's still dead? Charivari (talk) 22:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Because when I tried it, it threw an error (but not a 404). However, I see that it now goes through, so I now observe a different problem: it does not back up any part of the statement "Perkins guest-conducted the London Symphony Orchestra on 11 October 2009, at St Anne's Church Garden in Soho, London, UK. She conducted two pieces, the Simpsons Theme by Danny Elfman, and the William Tell Overture by Rossini, the latter for the first time." Accordingly, I've changed the tag to a {{Failed verification|date=September 2010}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:16, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ian Jack

Ian Jack is a short stub of an article which has 5 cites from reliable third party sources. Is this not enough? best Mick gold (talk) 12:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a biography of a living person. It therefore needs to be 100% referenced, to reliable third-party sources. At the time that I placed the {{BLP sources}} notice, it wasn't. Since then, two refs have been added: one of which (the Granta one) may fall within the area of self-published sources; but although the Observer one is fine as a reference source, it still doesn't back up everything that it's been placed against: it says nothing about him living in London with his wife and two children.

Several statements remain unrefd; of these, the ones which have the strongest need for a ref are those concerning his date and place of birth, wife and children. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Ian Jack is listed in Who's Who 2010, A&C Black, which I believe would be considered WP:RS. His entry reads:

‘JACK, Ian Grant’, Who's Who 2010, A & C Black, 2010; online edn, Oxford University Press, Dec 2009 ; online edn, Nov 2009 :::accessed 2 Nov 2010

JACK, Ian Grant

Born 7 Feb. 1945; s of Henry Jack and Isabella Jack (née Gillespie); m 1st, 1979, Aparna Bagchi (marr. diss. 1992); 2nd, 1998, Rosalind Sharpe; one s one d

writer and editor; Editor, Granta, 1995–2007

EDUCATION

Dunfermline High School, Fife

CAREER

Trainee journalist, Glasgow Herald, 1965; reporter, Cambuslang Advertiser and East Kilbride News, 1966; journalist, Scottish Daily Express, 1966–70; Sunday Times, 1970–86; Observer and Vanity Fair (NY), 1986–88; Dep. Editor, 1989–91, Exec. Editor, 1991–92, Editor, 1992–95, Independent on Sunday. Journalist of the Year, Granada TV What The Papers Say award, 1985; Colour Magazine Writer of the Year, 1985, Reporter of the Year, 1988, British Press Awards; Nat. Newspaper Editor of the Year, Newspaper Focus Awards, 1992.

So I have added some details to the WP article. best wishes Mick gold (talk) 13:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The Twin Dilemma

Sorry, I wasn't aware that the DW fans had limited cast notes to appearances in the series. However, the information is correct.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It needs to be relevant to the article, and must also be sourced - there is too much unsourced trivia in Wikipedia as it is, but the DW pages are a real magnet for it. Look at The Twin Dilemma#Cast notes: there are presently four entries there - all of them are unsourced, admittedly, but three have direct DW relevance - they are previous and/or future appearances in other DW serials. If we did put such "also appeared in" stuff into the DW serial articles, we could get something like "... appeared as Joshamee Gibbs in the Pirates of the Caribbean films; he also appeared in Not Quite Paradise, The Berlin Affair, Cry Freedom, Spice World, Sliding Doors ..." - it would just get silly. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair up to a point, but Joshamee Gibbs in the Pirates of the Caribbean films is by far the role for which Kevin McNally is best known. I do try not to add unsourced trivia to articles, but thought that this was worth mentioning. Anyway, not worth an edit war over this minor issue.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

KT5720 sub categories.

Hi there, thanks for you message. I wasn't aware at all. So for this article KT5720, your saying not to add Category:Biochemistry stubs but to add {{Biochem-stub}}? Does this apply to most articles or what is already listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Stub_types. --Visik (talk) 02:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Generally, any category ending in " stubs" should have at least one member which is a template ending in "-stub"; such templates should be listed at the top of the category (but after any subcategories). These stub templates should also be listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types, and if not listed, it's not been formally approved by WP:WPSS.

So, at Category:Biochemistry stubs, under 'Pages in category "Biochemistry stubs"', we find:

The following 196 pages are in this category, out of 1,365 total. This list may not reflect recent changes (learn more).

• Template:Biochem-stub
• Template:Metabolism-stub

If you click on one of these you'll get the stub template page and its documentation, which includes something like {{Biochem-stub}} so that you can copy&paste it. An examination of the text of the stub template should show its relevance; where more than one stub template is listed, try each one. In some cases (as here) there are subcategory pages, where you might find a stub template which is even more relevant. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Station Links

Hm, does this make you more of an 'anorak' than moi ? ! Anoraker (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a convention that is written down somewhere, but I just can't find anymore...

Basically, in articles primarily dealing with railway topics, we link to either the station or to the place, depending on context. We would link to the station articles in such circumstances as:

• the railway line was opened from x to y
• the town of X is served by two railway stations, y and z.
• the service runs between x and y

However we do link to the town/city/etc. articles in circumstances like these:

• A railway line between x and y was proposed but not built
• X railway station is situated in x, although it primarily serves the neighbouring town of y

--Redrose64 (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Puzzled

at someone from Lancashire not knowing the Wirral - even though it was in Cheshire. The book is still there (in the Class 40 article at least) in Further Reading. Looks like a useful book, even though self-published. (Many specialised books are - a classic on Jowett Cars advertising was self-published by a friend of mine.) Peridon (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

No, what I mean is, there is no such town as Wirral - there is a Metropolitan Borough of Wirral. A publisher's location is a town or city, not some local government conglomeration. So, if the publisher were based on the Wirral, we should really put Birkenhead, Wallasey, Hoylake or wherever. I happen to know that there is a publisher named Wirral (Wirral Publications Ltd, 3rd floor, 2A Price Street, Birkenhead CH41 6JN), so we need to be clear which is meant: the name of the publisher, or the publisher's location. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:29, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

No web site - only ghits are those bloody useless directories that clutter the place up. The Wirral has always been a fairly Wirral oriented area, from long before the borough was thought of, so he probably just means Wirral. He gives his name as the publisher, but it doesn't look like spam to me, or there'd be an more specific address or a site. Peridon (talk) 13:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi redrose64

I am Mike McManus, I have added the Ultimate Allocations information following a fellow enthusiast recommending that I do so. As other books as shown for information and sources etc I thought it would be ok to do so, if this is against the rules I can remove them as mentioned or what can I do to make it official? Any help would be appreciated. To view information on the books please visit www.ultimate-allocations.co.uk Regards Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike61680 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

Many thanks for your input and putting me straight, I looked at the other titles and considered the possibility of an advertising issue so I left out any direct method of contact e.g. e-mail etc. Anyway, would it be in the best interest for me to delete all the entries and enquire further about authorised inclusion? The books are the complete record of all locomotive movements, steam, diesel and electric on Briish Railways stock lists from 1950-1968 with additional information from 1948-1950 as available. I have had no negative response from anyone who has purchased them since 1995 when they were first advertised on Steam World, then Railway Magazine and Model Rail. The website gives a good overall coverage of what you can expect from the individual volumes (6off). This is my first attempt at adding anything on Wikipedia and perhaps in hindsight I should have known better than to take it for granted that you can add information without any issues. Thanks again, please advise on deletion Mike61680 (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)mike61680

Hackney Central edit

Hi, I've left an explanation on the talk page for Hackney Central train station as to why I believe (a small portion of) the article is out of date. Hope that helps clarify. Thanks! --Lost tourist (Talk) 14:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

The Middy

I've had a go at expanding {{Mid-Suffolk Light Railway}}, but am not 100% sure of the location of Gipping Siding, any ideas?. One or two roads need naming too. Mjroots (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Definitely between Lambert's Lane LC and Brown St LC. As to the exact location, see

• Comfort, Nicholas (1997) [1964]. The Mid-Suffolk Light Railway. Locomotion Papers (3rd ed.). Headington: Oakwood Press. p. 55. ISBN 0 85361 509 8. LP22.

It was 2 miles from Haughley (by rail), three-quarters of a mile from the hamlet of Gipping and was near to a handful of farms and cottages. I would say most likely at grid reference TM072641, although exactly where I couldn't say. It doesn't appear to have been a passenger station - the 1919 timetable on p. 94 has only goods trains calling, and these only "when required". The symbol would therefore be  (exBST). --Redrose64 (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, diag improved further. Mjroots (talk) 13:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hawkhurst Branch Line

Do you have access to the British Library's online collection of C19th British newspapers (access via local library website in most cases)? I've not had a look yet, but there could be plenty of material to expand the background, building, opening and early operation of the line there. Mjroots (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Pernicious nonsense on Talk:Abigail and Brittany Hensel

The remarkably uninformed and borderline-moronic rambling speculations about how Abigail and Brittany Hensel might hypothetically change their religions has absolutely no relevance to improving the Wikipedia article, and no place on the article talk page. If I had been aware of the comment at the time it was made, I would have instantly zapped it without compunction, and left a note on the relevant user talk page. You guys were more tolerant, which helped move the conversation along to a conclusion, maybe -- but now that conversation is over, and that means that the offensive idiocy needs to be GONE from the article talk page, perpetually and for ever, the sooner the better! -- AnonMoos (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied at original thread, per User talk:Redrose64/Editnotice. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Why not look up at the headers near the top of Talk:Abigail and Brittany Hensel, where you have a veritable menu to choose from, including WP:BLP and WP:TPO, to start with... AnonMoos (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Isn't it about time to archive this page?? -- AnonMoos (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Former London Electric Railway stations

I noticed that you categorised the stations on the Morden extension of the Northern line and the rest of the City & South London Railway stations as being former London Electric Railway stations. Strictly speaking, this is incorrect. The LER was formed from the merger of the Baker Street & Waterloo Railway, the Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway and the Great Northern Piccadilly & Brompton Railway. To a certain extent, the LER name did come to be used informally in a broader context, but the extension to Morden was carried out by the City & South London Railway. Although this had been taken over by the UERL in 1913, it continued to exist as a separate company within the group with its own board until the formation of the LPTB in 1933, it was never merged with the LER.

The same is true for Central London Railway stations.--DavidCane (talk) 21:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I did consider both those carefully, and could see arguments both ways. Checking through

• Day, John R.; Reed, John (2008) [1963]. The Story of London's Underground (10th ed.). Harrow: Capital Transport. ISBN 978 1 85414 316 7. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

I could not find an explicit statement that the C&SLR and CLR remained separate until 1933, but did find "In 1913, the C&SLR became part of the Underground Group" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 47); "On 1st January 1913, the Central London Railway became a member of the Underground Group" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 59); "section of the Central London Railway between Bank and Liverpool Street, opened six months before the line became part of the Underground Group" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 81); "The Underground Group had purchased the line [C&SLR] in 1913" (Day & Reed 2008, p. 90). --Redrose64 (talk) 13:02, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I researched this when I wrote the Central London Railway and City & South London Railway articles. All of the acts presented to parliament for permissions to carry out works or to make extensions to the lines were in the names of the original companies. This contrasts with the extensions of the Piccadilly and and Bakerloo which were done under the name of the LER. The List of transport undertakings transferred to the London Passenger Transport Board shows that the CLR and C&SLR were still in existence when the LPTB was formed in 1933.--DavidCane (talk) 17:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I've moved the stations between Clapham South and Morden from Category:Former London Electric Railway stations to Category:Former City and South London Railway stations. That leaves four stations in the former - Arnos Grove, Bounds Green, Oakwood (all Piccadilly Line) and Paddington (Bakerloo). I expect this quantity to increase in the next few days with the 1910-33 extensions to the Bakerloo, Northern and Piccadilly lines. I didn't find any Central Line stations in Category:Former London Electric Railway stations. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost interview

Reminder: This interview will be published this coming Monday. Your input is appreciated. – SMasters (talk) 04:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Letter-NumberCombination

Template:Letter-NumberCombination has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 23:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Ashford railway works‎

Your edit summary for this article mentioned a section being a derail. I found that humorous. i kan reed (talk) 17:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

It did? Where? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it said "detail". Nevermind, that's completely unfunny. Sorry to have bothered you. i kan reed (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

NR symbol

Just to make things clear, the NR logo was removed from being along side the overground one (I don't know which by user) so I had to re-add the NR logo at stations which share the services as no NR logo was shown. It seems that the logo has been re-added along side. Likelife (talk) 21:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Mmm. Well, I do think that having any symbols is unnecessary, except in cases where two stations on different systems have separate articles (e.g. on the various West Hampsteads it's a quick visual reminder that you've reached the right one). But two NR symbols very close together looks sloppy. I'm not on a crusade to remove all the symbols though: should people wish that, we can easily amend the infobox templates. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

We should centralise this. See WT:UKRAIL#Symbols, London Overground and National Rail Simply south...... eating shoes for 5 years So much for ER 22:03, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I completely understand and I am also unsure if its necessary. I've also added a comment about whether the logo(s) are needed to the new talk section created by User:SS. Likelife (talk) 22:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

RE Ashford Railway Works

re your undoing of my additions:

Much of the info I added was specific to the locos built at Ashford and gave info on what happened to these units and therefore I felt would round out the history of the products of the works. I accept errors must be corrected but don't believe wholesale deletion was appropriate, however I defer to your opinion.

I will not re-instate, c'est la vie :-)

If the table isn't the correct place for info (what and where) on Ashford loco's that still exist and are therefore an enduring testament to the 1,000's of men and women of the works then do you think a para at the end of the article would be appropriate?

Wikikipper (talk) 22:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

My edit summary stated "sorry, but this sort of detail (some of which is incorrect) belongs on the individual class articles, not on a summary list". If you look at the table, in the first column of each row there is a link to the relevant locomotive class; follow that, and you will most likely find that the article on the specific class already has the relevant information. If it's not there, it may be added: but the information should be sourced, see WP:REFBEGIN. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Whilst the articles on the various classes do give information on surviving loco's, having read through them (using the links from the table) it is not always readily apparent that any of the preserved engines are Ashford products. It struck me as a casually interested reader of the Ashford Works article page to pose the question: What happened to these locos.? I therefore thought a specific summary (or additional section) on the Ashford page giving info on surviving Ashford locos might be useful - I recall how proud my grandfather was to draw my attention to the Ashford made D-class loco at the NRM. You seem to disagree, so I guess I'll let it rest. :-) Wikikipper (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Knockholt railway station

Hi, Redrose64. Just so you know, I saw your note regarding the need for page numbers for the reference of the history of Knockholt railway station and have now added them. Regards Rickedmo (talk) 23:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Heilmann locomotive

I've just discovered the Heilmann steam-electric locomotives! Will write an article tonight, but wondered how to describe the wheel arrangement. As electric locomotives, Do-Do fits the bill, but as steam locomotives, would they be 0-(2-2-2-2)-(2-2-2-2)-0 locomotives - all wheels were powered by there were no connecting rods. The locomotives were not articulated. Thoughts? Mjroots (talk) 07:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

There does not seem to have been any mechanical connection between the pistons and the wheels, so I don't think that giving a Whyte-type wheel arrangement is applicable. I would say that we can consider the analogous situation of a Diesel locomotive: for those with rigid frames and mechanical transmission, a Whyte wheel arrangement is usually given, but for those with bogies and electric transmission, we generally use the continental system.

Here, we have both bogies and an electric transmission, so I think we can ignore the fact that the generator is driven by a steam engine and not a Diesel engine, so in the absence of sources explicitly stating the wheel arrangement, we go with what we can determine from the contemporary description: "two four-axle bogie trucks; each of the eight axles being actuated by an axle-wound motor". Under the UIC notation, a loco with four powered axles in one frame is D; two four-axle bogies is D'D', and it's clear that each axle is individually driven by traction motors so we use "o", which gives Do'Do'. I don't think that anybody will put up a serious argument against that. You will need to create Category:Do-Do locomotives analogous to Category:Co-Co locomotives and Category:D-D locomotives; you may also wish to create the page Do-Do locomotives analogous to Co-Co locomotives, but since there isn't a D-D locomotives, it's probably not necessary in this case. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree with Do'Do'. Evidence is pretty clear that they were bogies and that there were separate traction motors - that in itself must have been quite unusual at this time? Whyte notation just isn't flexible enough to make sense for anything not a "Stephenson" locomotive. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

What you say makes sense in that the wheels were not driven directly by the steam engine. I was thinking of the LNWR compounds which were a 2-(2-2)-2 wheel arrangement, but looked outwardly like a 2-4-2 sans coupling rods. I'll stick to Do-Do for these. Mjroots (talk) 15:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Do-Do is something of a British notation; these being French, I'd say it was probably a good idea to also give the axle arrangement under the French convention. According to fr:Classification des locomotives#Locomotives électriques et thermiques, the French system is the same as UIC, i.e. Do'Do'. You might be able to get away with putting |aarwheels=D-D |uicclass=Do'Do' in the infobox, Do-Do elsewhere.

I didn't mention earlier, but this is an ideal opportunity to use |transmission= and related parameters of {{infobox locomotive}} for a steam loco. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I've made a start at Heilmann locomotive. Mjroots (talk) 17:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

L&Y Class 8

Thanks for your response re L&Y Class 8. Page numbers now added for the specific references. Masons remark is at the bottom of p80 (1975 edition) and the number of LMS classes is mentioned in LMS profiles at bottom LH of p80. (co-incidence)

I also corrected the as-built driving wheel diameters. See Mason p73 "It emerged from Horwich Works in June 1908, the precursor of 20 engines..........with 6ft 3 in coupled wheels" Nock pp 131-132 "introduced in 1908..................Their leading dimensions..........6ft 3in coupled wheels......

(CharlesMoor (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC))

DLR Stratford International extension

I got the information for the opening date and service patterns of the Docklands Light Railway Stratford International extension from IanVistis website, which I referenced and the DLR press room, in an email sent on 16/08/11, which I have pasted below:

Dear George

The Stratford International extension is due to open in the next few weeks, but I am currently unable to confirm a date.

The DLR services will operate Monday-Saturday between 05.30-00.30 and on Sundays between 07.00-23.30 Services will operate between Stratford International and Woolwich Arsenal via Canning Town during peak hours (06.30- 09.30 and 16.00-19.00 on weekdays). Outside of peak times, trains will operate via Canning Town through to Beckton. Trains on the new route run approximately every 8 minutes to Woolwich Arsenal and Beckton.

Trust that this addresses your queries.

Thanks, Myriam WalburMy@tfl.gov.uk]

So if you could put everthing back to how I left it, that would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you. George Moore 1995. — Preceding unsigned comment added by George Moore 1995 (talk • contribs) 10:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately private emails don't count as published sources, and so are inadmissible, per the policy on verifiability. Please see WP:Referencing for beginners and WP:Citing sources to see how to add references to your edits. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I put a reference to the Ian Visits website. When the extension opens, could you please put everything back? And the email was from DLR. George Moore 1995 George Moore 1995 (talk) 11:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have again looked through those of your edits which I undid, and I cannot find any evidence that you gave "the Ian Visits website" as a reference - nor that you provided any other source. It doesn't matter who the email was from - emails are not (generally speaking) published, and so do not fall within the requirement for reliable, third-party, published sources. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion.

Hello,

An article you have helped edit, Confirmation and overclaiming of aerial victories during World War II (which was formerly entitled "Confirmation and overclaiming of aerial victories") has been proposed for deletion.

Georgejdorner (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm hardly a major contributor. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:02, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Weaving

Talk:Weaving I have placed a proposal there you may wish to comment on --ClemRutter (talk) 10:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Happy Birthday for a few days ago then. I suppose it isn't all that unusual as Modern Railways's next month edition usually comes through my door around the 20th of each month. Simply south...... creating lakes for 5 years 20:14, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Somerset cricketers in WP:Somerset?

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Somerset#Somerset cricketers. Harrias ^talk 20:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Followup RFA question

Did you take a look at Kunwar Amar in determining that the rest of the articles in the Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as importance or significance not asserted were properly included? (The creator did remove the tag briefly between my question and your answer, so its possible it wasn't there when you looked) Monty₈₄₅ 18:32, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes; the version that I examined was this one. He's a contestant on a TV show; this is demonstrated by the sole ref. But are contestants important? I thought that the article subject needed to have won the contest. Similarly, he's an actor - but has he won any awards? Once we're past the lede, things quickly deteriorate. His birth (which is split over two sections) is put across as some kind of unusual, even miraculous, event, and trivial events are hyped up - such as attending an audition. Sentences like "Kuwar Amar was Even a Dance Teacher in Some Secondary School , where he teaches Dancing Styles to Kids" are vague. Which school? Did he get a write-up in the press about this teaching work? Sorry, but if I had come across this at AFD I'd have !voted Delete. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:14, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding voting to delete at AfD, fair enough. But my concern is that at the CSD stage, the rules for deletion are much more restrictive. To delete an article under CSD criteria A7 requires that the article contain no claim of importance. Claim of importance is a far lower standard then notability, and while being an actor on Dil Dosti Dance may or may not be enough to establish notability, it is enough to qualify as a claim of importance. When considering A7, claims of importance also need no references. Monty₈₄₅ 19:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Reliable source

Hi,

The 'reliable' source were my late father's notes, written during the 50's and 60's when he lived and worked in West Hampshire. I have provided information to Nigel Bray who wrote the recent volume on the S&DJR, you will find me credited in the book. Amateur historians have always been the core of research on railways and often provide a more accurate source than official company records. A small part of my father's collection of images of the S&DJR has recently been published on-line, although many are the work of other photographers nevertheless my father created one of the most comprehensive collection of images of the S&DJR.

Tim Hale — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altezeitgruppe (talk • contribs) 18:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I'm afraid that use of personal notes is inadmissible, because they aren't published - see the policy on verifiability. They might also be seen to fall foul of the policy on original research. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:42, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

The notes were published- they were used by Nigel Bray in the Kestrel Publications book, if you care to examine the list of contributors in the book, you will find my name. Perhaps, you might modify my source to the Nigel Bray book?

I also believe that my father published observations in the Railway Magazine however these are not in my possession as I only have his personal notes.

Where do you think authors obtain their information?

Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.164.18 (talk) 20:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

If your father's notes were used to write a published work, then that published work should be used as the ref source, because I could go to a public library and ask to borrow that book, but I can't ask to borrow the notes. Accordingly, you should indicate which book that is, and on which page of that book, against each piece of information. I see that a book by Bray and published by Kestrel is already listed at the bottom of the article (in the Sources section). Assuming that this is the book to which you refer, what you need to do is to add some suitable reference marks denoting that this is the source, and where in that source the information is to be found - i.e. the page numbers.

If you look at other sections in the article - for example, the one following, titled Closure, you'll see several numbers enclosed in square brackets, and superscripted. These are the reference marks. Observe that the first of these occurs at the end of the second paragraph ("claiming it was losing £100 a mile per week^[26].") Click on the [edit] button for that section, and find the same passage. You'll see that this ends as follows:

claiming it was losing £100 a mile per week{{sfn|Bray|2010|p=61}}.

The {{sfn}} template is a method for creating shortened footnotes; and it is given the surnames of up to four authors, the publication year, and the page number - this last is indicated as |p= if one page is relevant, but |pp= if two or more pages.

I don't have Bray's book, but let's assume, for example, that your passage about agriculture was drawn from material on pages 123–4 of the book, and the passage about commuter housing is on p. 567. You would amend the paragraph like this:

as were strawberries and other soft fruit,{{sfn|Bray|2010|pp=123–4}}

and horses a priority for the local landowners.{{sfn|Bray|2010|p=567}}

This will be consistent with the rest of the article, and is in line with our policy on verifiability.

If you know which issues of The Railway Magazine that the article appeared in, or even just the year, I will be happy to have a look in my pile of back issues: I am certain to have it, unless it was published more than 71 years ago (my most recent gap is the October 1940 issue).

Authors obtain their information from primary sources, such as those notes. But Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, it obtains its information from secondary sources - published works available to the general public. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

RfA question

I'm writing to offer a bit of an apology. I hadn't intended my RfA question to you to be a trick question. Unfortunately, it did (that would be my own ignorance of CSD showing through); fortunately, you caught it! The question was based on an actual situation which I was a part of not too long ago. The true situation was very similar to my question, the main difference being that the forum was WP:DRV, not WP:AFD.

Anyway, I am thoroughly impressed with your nomination. I have !voted in your favor, and I expect you to make an excellent admin. Ozob (talk) 21:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Coordinates vs Lat Long in infoboxes

Red, I see you made some changes to the cemetery infobox. Looks like you are quite knowledgeable in this stuff. I've raised a question as to whether both Coordinates and Lat/Long is needed (or desirable) in infoboxes. Seems to me that Coordinates simply asks for Lat/Long data. If so, why do we have both parameters? And what will change if we delete the Lat/Long parameters? The cemetery box is one that caught my attention, but I think the Coord Lat/Long parameters exist in many more boxes. Can you assist? Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Your RfA

It looks like your RfA will be successful, and that puts me in the awkward situation of being the first to oppose it. I just wanted to send you a short note to congratulate you on the successful RfA, and I hope you won't take my opposition personally. My oppose was mostly based on principle, and realistically I think you'll do just fine. Cheers. —SW— ^converse 23:48, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you think it's right to oppose a candidate on principle when "realistically you think they'll do just fine"? I think RfA would be a better place if people stopped opposing on a principle and commented after taking careful consideration of all the evidence. In the end, it all comes back to whether the candidate can be trusted or not. I notice that several times recently you have been among a small minority of opposers at an RfA - perhaps it would be fruitful to reconsider your criteria? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

In my last 50 RfA votes, there is exactly one other RfA where I was in a small minority of opposers, and that was Worm That Turned. There are exactly two other successful RfA's that I opposed, but I was hardly in a small minority (one had 21 opposes, the other had 16). So, this is not the grand pattern that you make it out to be. If I see a candidate who expresses an intention to work in an area, but has little or no demonstrated experience in that area, I'm going to oppose. I really don't see anything wrong with that, and I have no plans to change that criterion (and just about every other oppose at the RfA was based on the same logic). The only reason I posted this message is because RedRose made it clear that he would ease into deletion slowly and carefully, and he's obviously competent so I doubt there will be many problems. Sheesh, I can't even post a friendly, cordial message without an argument? —SW— ^yak 14:20, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure Redrose will take your comment with the good will that was intended. And I apologise for suggesting there was a pattern - I don't take part in many RfAs and WTT must have been the other one I had noticed recently. It was not my intention to start an argument, as you put it, but merely to have a friendly discussion and encourage you to reflect. It was quite right for you and others to point out the possible pitfalls of starting to work in deletion with little experience in this area, and Redrose will do well to heed this advice. But by opposing over this, you have effectively ignored 41,000 edits which say one thing (the candidate will make a good admin) over a single edit which might possibly indicate a problem. Rather than looking at one issue, I'm suggesting that we should look at the whole picture and, in this case, that picture was very clear to a lot of us. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Where did my other 2000+ edits come from? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Haha, no idea. Fixed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		Home-Made Barnstar
		Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Redrose64; your answer to q5 was brilliant. John (talk) 06:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

You are now an administrator

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to get in touch on my talk page. WJBscribe (talk) 13:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Yay! --Redrose64 (talk) 13:36, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Like JORGENEV 13:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations. Sorry I missed the RfA, I've been tied up with other Wiki issues, but I'm sure your very deserving. Good job! Worm^TT · (talk) 14:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratz!

You'll need it!

Uniform issue

Congrats Redrose! HurricaneFan25 13:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the most hated Wikipedians club! Your uniform has been issued. Mjroots (talk) 13:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! --Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

A little Dr Who memorabilia for you

Whoosh that is a big mop and bucket. You certainly deserve them and I send my congrats too. In my meanderings around wikipedia I came across this article Aristide Bruant with the accompanying picture by Lautrec. It reminded me of a Dr Who poster that I bought at the 20th anniversary convention in Chicago in 1983 (can 28 years really have gone by?) Unfortunately, it went astray in a long distance move that I endured back in the 90's but thanks to the internet I was able to track down this website [1] which has a picture of it. I enjoy how creative fans of a given show can be and I thought that I would share it with you to celebrate your successful RFA. Cheers and best wishes in the days ahead. MarnetteD | Talk 13:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the beer. A tad early for happy hour my time but I'm sure that when I was young and in college I TGIF'd at this time of the morning. Thanks again. MarnetteD | Talk 15:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I'm proud of you for your sucessful RfA. In order please remove the other rights on your userbox becuase you are now an admin and you can keep your admin userbox. Thanks Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For the beer, and congratulations. I'm sure that being an admin need be no more stressful than being an un-mopped janitor, but you can be more effective. Rich Farmbrough, 14:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC).

Well done on your successful adminship, Redrose. It was a massive ratio of supports! Jaguar (talk) 14:53, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations - hope you have a productive time as an Admin. Thanks for the beer. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 15:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, too, thanks for the beer, it was good. Here is your mug back... --rogerd (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats. You know you have a week to warm up before you have to start meeting the daily quota for indefinite blocks, random deletions, unnecessary full protection, and secret messages to other admins. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 15:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations and enjoy using the tools. --John (talk) 15:20, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Was a little early for beer, a cup of tea would have been nicer, but I drank it anyway. Cheers. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats on your successful adminship! Use your tools wisely. Cheers, —mc10 (t/c) 15:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations. I hope you find the new tools useful. Just remember these rules:

1. have patience with others.
2. Don't be quick to judge other actions. Usually it's an honest mistake.
3. If you get offended try to stay calm. Don't threaten. Vandals love when editors like you get frustrated. So keep your cool and they'll turn away.

If you play by these rules you'll be able have a lot of pleasure editing with the aid of your new tools. –BuickCenturyDriver 17:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey; thanks for the beer! I hope I can't get blocked for editing drunk! :P Tofutwitch11 ^(TALK) 19:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, and thanks for the beer! All those new buttons sound overwhelming. Why don't you test them out here? :P To anyone who's reviewing my contribs in consideration of my RfA...that was a joke. Swarm 06:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for the beer (London Pride for me, ta) and here's wishing you well. Plutonium27 14:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

For being a all new admin ready to fight the deeds of the fearful vandals! :D Btw I think bubble tea will be more healthier than beer, as you need some energy to fight the vandals. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 15:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! Use the tools wisely and please don't delete Great Malvern Station :) --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

You're screwed

RfA Condolences

It is with sorrow that I see your RfA was condemned to giving you the extra buttons. As I've frequently said, those silly enough to stand for RfA are singularly unqualified to be an administrator. As painful as that is, it gets worse. You will soon be a cynical tyrant who ignores the bleating cud chewing scum known as us non-admins. I see from your userpage that you already suffer from editcountitis, barnstaritis, and userboxitis. I think your immune system is compromised, and you will soon be suffering from adminitis. (add happy smileys as necessary to the above if you're humor organ is suffering malhumoritis!) In all seriousness; congratulations. :) Hammersoft (talk) 17:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Cheers

If you need any help or advice while settling into your new role, don't hesitate to ask. I probably know someone who will know the answer... 8-) Peridon (talk) 17:55, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions on moving files to Wikimedia Commons

I added {{db-author}} to the two files mentioned for deletion. Any comments on the files mentioned for moving to Wikimedia? --DThomsen8 (talk) 18:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Not yet: I am presently examining File:AbandonedDraft1.png, it may well have been deleted by the time that you read this.

As an alternative to the <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags, you can use the {{tlx}} template to produce a template link without transcluding the template itself, also note that we typically use the word "Commons" to refer to Wikimedia Commons, because Wikimedia covers many other sites - including the English Wikipedia. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Have now replied at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Images and Media#Questions on moving files to Wikimedia Commons. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:40, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Belated congrats

Hi Redrose. Congratulations on a sucessful RfA. I was pleased to see you had broad support from users of different areas of the project, and really strong support from those that hang out in VPT. I recall seing you when I first discovered VPT and, at the time, I thought your were a Dev and just assumed you had the Admin bit too because of your experience and knowledge. It wasn't until later I discovered you weren't and I thought you really should be an Admin.

Sorry about the hub-bub I caused for mentioning the nominators !votes. I was going to leave a note for Martin and Rich, but I know that some RfA regulars are overly concerned about canvassing. That's why I left a note in my comment, so it would be above-board for all to see. I figured Rich and Martin had your RfA watchlisted and would see my note. I had no idea that my note would cause the little bit of drama that it did, so I aplogize for that. Glad to see it all got sorted out.

Anyhoo, I'm quite pleased that you finally got the bit as your are one of our best contributors and your help with administrative tasks will be very much appreciated. Thanks for your support of the project and for the beer too. Best regards. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 18:55, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Tees railway viaduct and a welcoming attitude

Well done, Redrose64, and good luck with your shiny new mop and bucket. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thank you for helping a clueless new user out with a template and not getting discouraged Bar Code Symmetry (Talk) 23:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Redrose64! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Recent comment on my talk page.

When providing feedback about any edit that an editor makes, it is absolutely vital that you provide no clue whatsoever as to what edit you have a problem with. I am pleased to note that you are maintaining this important tradition. 109.156.49.202 (talk) 16:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on user talk page. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Articles containing overlapping coordinates

I appreciate your help with removing redundant coordinates from articles. Thanks to you, I feel like we've finally got some traction. I'm working the report alphabetically and am now in the N's. Let me know if you'd like to further coordinate our efforts. And keep up the good work! Best regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 19:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Er, I'm up to the Ns too! I stopped at Nofei Nehemia because Firefox was refusing to preserve the alpha sort when returning to the page, and I was getting annoyed at having to go to top, click the sort arrows, and page down twice again. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

In that case, I'll start working backwards from the end of the list. Thanks again. —Stepheng3 (talk) 20:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Redrose64 (talk) 17:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

On the list prepared today, I've done 34 of the 36. The two I didn't do are Bhajanpura (which I also skipped last time), because it uses {{Infobox Indian Jurisdiction}}, a template currently being deleted; and Kirtland Temple, because I can't find the second set of coordinates. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all that. Deletion of {{Infobox Indian jurisdiction}} has been in process for some time. I'll see if I can do those last two. —Stepheng3 (talk) 05:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Original Research

Maybe you should try to find out what original research is. If I determine the distance between two points using publicly available documentation (like an Ordnance Survey map) that would be establishing information from verifiable sources (Wikipedia calls it a citation). If I were to physically measure the distance myself, that would be Original Research. The Tube Map published by LUL clearly shows no stations on the Metropolitan Line between Finchley Road and Wembley Park (and that is a perfectly valid cite). What stations are on the adjacent line is totally irrelevant. You claim that there are platform facings certainly sounds like Original Research to me, but so what? The Metropolitan Line does not stop at any stations between Finchley Road and Wembley Park. The Tube map clearly says so. You haven't claimed that the distance between Chesham and Chalfont and Latimer was Original Research so you are also applying double standards. It can't be anything else as the supplied (archived) cite doesn't even mention it.

It's not adviseable to reply on my user talk page because my IP address has a habit of changing without warning (I have no control over this, though it has been a lot more stable since I changed to fibre optic broadband). 109.156.49.202 (talk) 13:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Station Names in other languages

Something for you to think about, Asarlaí (talk · contribs) has been adding Gaelic and Scots names to a lot of station articles. You might like to check them out. I am almost certain that Scots does not appear on any station sign, and Gaelic is appearing at more Scottish station, but I am certain most modified have not been so named. My understanding of the template was that it was only added when applied to the station sign. Thoughts? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 15:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I have taken this to WT:TIS#Scots and Gaelic names on railway station articles, because I think it deserves a wider audience. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 16:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Class D1/1

I have found some more definite allocation information on this class of shunter locos. This is detailed on the talk page for that class. Can you review and if happy remove the dubious? Many thanks. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

Thanks for the beer

Sorry for the delayed reply. Thanks so much for the lovely beer :) And congrats on the adminship. Wifione ^Message 04:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Girnar

I notice you fixed this page a couple of weeks ago; in the process you transported the mountain into the Atlantic Ocean! Another miracle! Anyway I thought it might amuse you. Moonraker12 (talk) 15:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Aha, sorry. The page had shown up on Wikipedia:Database reports/Articles containing overlapping coordinates (row 122), i.e there were two sets of coords competing for the same spot at upper right. These are usually caused by there being a {{coord}} somewhere on the page (not necessarily in the infobox, although it was in this case), and also some lat/long params in the infobox. In such cases I examine several items to check which is "correct". Note that before my change, the infobox had the following:

| lat_d             = 21 | lat_m = 29 | lat_s = 41 | lat_NS = N
| lat_m             = 
| lat_s             = 
| lat_NS            = 
| long_d            = 70 | long_m = 30 | long_s = 20 | long_EW = W
| long_m            = 
| long_s            = 
| long_EW           = 

that is, six of the parameters were specified twice each. In such cases, the MediaWiki software ignores the first of each pair - even when the second of the pair is blank. Thus, my removal of the blank ones made the non-blank ones visible, including the error of |long_EW=W. Clearly I overlooked the hemisphere error here because I felt that the removal of |coordinates={{coord|21|29|41|N|70|30|20|E|display=title}} was safe. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

No wories; the mistake was already there (as you've seen), your edit only uncovered it. I just thought it was a laugh.

Incidentally, , according to Geohack the new location is right by the site of Red Rackham’s treasure, if that makes any sense to you...Moonraker12 (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes... but was the position based upon the Greenwich meridian, or the Paris meridian? (p. 23) --Redrose64 (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah! Well the article (sacred mountains in India, and Belgian cartoon stories; only on wikipaedia, hey?) gives both positions, but only the Greenwich one shows the treasure (cunning blighters!). Anyway, keep smiling, Moonraker12 (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

John Rhys-Davies

Dear Redrose,

I met John Davies (before he added his father's name Rhys) in about 1966, shortly after he married my cousin Suzanne Wilkinson and was still just a repertory actor. He told me himself that he had been born in Salisbury and baptized at home in Ammanford. There: straight from the horse's mouth, so no discussion needed. I think you'll find his birth was registered in Salisbury, too (try the Findmypast web site).

Do I have a talk page? Can't find it. I was playing with computers when you were still in the cradle, which means I'm what the Germans call vorbelastet: they've changed faster than I can keep pace.

Weehugh (talk) 07:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC) Hugh

Yes, every user has a talk page; the link to that is the words User talk: followed by the user name, so yours is User talk:Weehugh - at present, you are reading my talk page.

When logged in, you will see at upper right, six links as follows:

Weehugh My talk My preferences My watchlist My contributions Log out

Second from the left is My talk, which is the direct link to your talk page.

In addition to that, every article has a talk page, and its name is Talk: followed by the article name, e.g. Talk:John Rhys-Davies. At the top of the article you will see some tabs; the two on the left are titled Article and Discussion; on the John Rhys-Davies article, the Discussion tab leads to the talk page specific to the article. If you follow that, you will find that there are presently 15 discussion topics (some are quite old, so are effectively dead). The 14th of these, titled What? is the most recent one concerning place of birth.

To address the main point. Per the policy on living persons and the policy on verifiability, in order for the article to state that he was born in Salisbury, you need to provide a reliable source which not only disprove the existing sources which state Ammanford, but also explicitly states that he was born in Salisbury. See WP:SOURCES, where it states

Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form); unpublished materials are not considered reliable. Sources should directly support the material presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. In general, the best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments; as a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Content related to living people or medicine should be sourced especially carefully.

Therefore, personal knowledge and word-of-mouth information are inadmissible, because they are not "third-party, published sources". --Redrose64 (talk) 09:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Template for AfD

Hi Redrose, I posted the following message at the WP:AFD talk page nearly 3 days ago and didn't get any responses. I thought maybe you could give me your personal opinion of the template. Thanks. Magister Scienta^talk 01:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I've designed a very useful (it is of course also space-efficent and visually pleasing) new template that displays links to recent AfD logs. To see of an example of what it looks like, see the 11/21 log here (it's the first one on the page). I am looking for a consensus to put this template on the top of all log pages of AfD's for a particular day. I encourage people to take a look at its code (I've triple-checked it but new eyes are always good). I hope others agree with me that this template would be a valuable addition to the log pages as an added, unobtrusive convenience. Thanks.

Socks

If it looks like a cheesy sock and smells like a cheesy sock, then the likelihood is that it's a cheesy sock. Might be worth raising at ANI for more experienced admins to take a look at. BTW, have you unlocked the case to your banhammer yet? Mjroots (talk) 12:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

re: Strange category name

Category:Categories named after districts of England seems strange but is a standard way of naming "eponymous categories" (Category:Eponymous categories). Category:Districts of England should contain the articles about the districts. e.g. Adur (district), and Category:Categories named after districts of England should the categories, e.g. Category:Adur. Tim! (talk) 08:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

TBR1

Hi. My group and I have been editting the TBR1 page in wikipedia for our Neuroscience class. We noticed that you had edited it severaal times and would appreciate any advice you have on how to make it better. We are trying to make it a Good Article according to Wikipedia standards. Thanks.

JaimeeDavis (talk) 21:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

One edit is not "severaal times". --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi you left me a message regarding Chippenham Station. I assumed you could write all platforms as it is the same with Portsmouth Harbour? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chip123456 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Coronation Street timeline

Coronation Street timeline page....reference ....24 October 2011 Added new information. Having problems controlling text format, needs control characters to sort out the word spacing and line breaks ( * character has thrown the spacing off )!!!!! Cannot find the ones to do the corrections. I have got rusty on editing !!!!!! BTW I am still looking for non copyright photo's of Sacha Parkinson and Brooke Vincent, have asked their agent to look see at (Wiki) their entries and verify the facts stated, plus please send me non copyright photo's of both actresses. Did you know that Parkinson has quite Corrie this month ? Corrie will not be worth watching soon!!!!! PS I read somewhere your into railways.....do you do model trains too.....I do Z scale ( the tiny German stuff )costs a small fortune !!!!Thanxs gren500Gren500 (talk) 06:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC) Gren500 (talk) 03:56, 9 Decemberies ande Wiki entrk seloor agent to i asked the 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gren500 (talk • Contributions/Gren500) 03:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC non copyrightor)

Regarding formatting at Coronation Street timeline: most of this is set out as a series of bulleted lists, where each list entry starts with an asterisk * - see Help:List, also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists (in particular, WP:BULLETLIST) for further information.

One problem is that you are not always adding the asterisk at the start of the entry. Another is that you are starting new lines at peculiar intervals - when you reach the right-hand side of the edit box, just keep typing, and it'll sort the word wrapping automatically. A split line within a bulleted list will terminate the list and treat subsequent text as a normal paragraph. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clean up of my text problems, and the info on the solutions.Gren500 (talk) 22:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Doctor Who Episode Improvement Idea

As a member of WP:WHO, I thought you may be interested in this idea. No one has replied yet. Glimmer721 ^talk 17:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dearne Valley Railway RDT

Template:Dearne Valley Railway RDT has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 07:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Scotrail articles

User:RGloucester has moved ScotRail to ScotRail (1997-2004) and First ScotRail to ScotRail (2004-present) without discussion. In the first case, the proposed change had been discussion with no agreement to change. This should really have been discussed at WP:TIS before the change, which I have suggested. Can you get them back to some sort of order, since the first article covered the whole period from the creation of the ScotRail, and it is now split. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 22:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Have you informed the user of their error? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Working my way through WP:TIS notification, user was next, however an anon IP is now editing the articles. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 22:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Restored status quo ante regarding names; move protected for 1 week but I'll lift that should TIS so desire. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

a caution about WP:AWB and day=

Hi. Please see User talk:GoingBatty#WP:AWB breaking footnote links. You made several similar edits:

• Diff of Template:Cite doi/10.1126.2Fscience.215.4532.499
• Diff of Template:Cite doi/10.1126.2Fscience.212.4491.159

These did not cause breakages, but I thought you should be aware of the issue. Best, Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't use AWB. I prefer to make my own decisions regarding what edits to make. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

That's interesting. I didn't say you used AWB, but GoingBatty's edits were done with it. I'll use scripts and such, but do try to be careful. Thanks for illustrating a better approach to this issue. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

While I used AWB's replace template functionality to fix many articles in Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters, AWB has no functionality to change day/month/year parameters to date parameters. Therefore, my edits to Ithaca Chasma and Tethys (moon) were done manually inside AWB, just the same if I had done it in my web browser. It took me a lot of time to figure out the issue with my edits, as it's not obvious with my web browser in full screen mode. Thank you Tycho for pointing out my error, and thank you Redrose for fixing these pages properly. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

As I said on your talkpage, I assume it was AWB because of the edit summary. I've never used it myself. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

← I've been thinking about the best uses of {{sfnRef}}. I believe that the inline usages should be 'short' and that's why I have often used sfnRef. If editors see {sfn | last1 | last2 | last3 | last4 | year | p=} and the names are long and hard to spell, they won't like sfn and may prefer ref name= using a short name. So I use sfnRef and one or two names and the year. I'd be interested in other views on this. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you take that to Template talk:sfn please? My talk page is not the best place for such discussions. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense. See you there. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Sir John Beddington - Fukushima incident

Hi. I work In Sir John Beddington's Government Office for Science, and a concern was raised about the accuracy of how the reporting of the Fukushima incident is portrayed on the page.

The 'controversy' section on John Beddington's entry on Wikipedia is misrepresentative. The Independent article that much of the section quotes (ref 16) is fundamentally inaccurate, so whilst the wiki quotes the Independent article accurately it is quoting flawed information. The key statement is that Beddington's advice "resulted in a significant delay in evacuating British citizens from Japan." This is wrong. The advice of the Science Advisory Group in Emergencies (SAGE), which Beddington Chairs, throughout was that there was no need for British citizens to evacuate Tokyo. Consequently there was no recommendation from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) to do so.

The minutes from the SAGE meetings and the FCO's advice corroborate this. http://www.bis.gov.uk/go-science/science-in-government/global-issues/civil-contingencies http://ukinjapan.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=566406782

Furthermore, and following from this falsehood, the section in its entirety paints a wholly negative picture of the GCSA's response to the crisis when the reverse is true, as evidenced by the following:

- In the BBC Radio 4 programme Material World on 24 November 2011, Sir John Beddington’s response in communicating the risks during the Fukushima crisis was described by Lord Krebs, Chair of the House of Lords Science & Technology Committee as “exemplary” http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qyyb

- Michael Hanlon, then science editor of the Daily Mail, also had praise for Beddington’s response, saying he couldn’t have explained it more clearly. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1367289/Japan-earthquake-tsunami-Are-right-worry-nuclear-angle.html

Overall, it’s unfair for someone to have written this about John without our right of reply. I'd be very grateful for any advice at all about how we go about rectifying this in a transparent manner.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 11:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I have made just two edits to the article John Beddington, and I fail to see how either of them could cause you these concerns. The first was to fix misuse of the {{London Gazette}} template. The second was an edit concerned partly with the Manual of Style, and partly with correct English usage - we would say "Sir John", or "Beddington", never "Sir Beddington"; and when he was at school, he had not yet been knighted, so "Beddington" is the only valid form. I also moved one full stop in line with WP:REFPUNC.

Regarding the remainder of your comments above, it would be best if you were to note these on the article's discussion page, which is at Talk:John Beddington. In this way they will gain the attention of people more directly concerned with that article. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't accusing you of writing the text on Fukushima, it is simply that you were the last person to edit the page so most likely to be active! I was simply asking you if you could edit the page accordingly as for our office to do so would not be fair or unbiased. Do you suggest there's someone else I should approach?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 14:24, 15 December 2011

EDIT: OK, re-read your comments... I will add the to the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 15 December 2011‎

Hi again. I left a message on the Beddington talk page and have had no response. could you advise on what to do next? Thanks. Happydan.uk (talk) 12:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I am afraid that such matters are well outside my realm, so I have raised two requests for outside assistance - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#John Beddington misrepresentation and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#John Beddington misrepresentation. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Happydan.uk (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Correction

Hi,

The source is from the Go! Cooperative Wikipedia site. I have out proposed now and it is stated that it is a proposal service. The source is reliable.--Chip123456 (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page, because that's where the thread started. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

You can also have a look on the GOCO website and look at newspaper websites. There are more than one reliable sources. --Chip123456 (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page, because that's where the thread started. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:27, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

they are reliable. I have collected lots of information from all different websites. It is reliable, which means that the information on the pages can be added.

Thank you for your help and advice it has been most appreciated. --Chip123456 (talk) 21:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

There is no need to start a new section for each reply. It is also best to reply on the thread that you are replying to: this avoids disjoint discussions and saves time for everybody. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Train

it is being directed though to the information page. Oxford shows future services as well. --Chip123456 (talk) 10:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

)

References

maybe you could assist adding a reference instead of undoing correct edits to the page. I did do my research before adding information to the Chippenham and Melksham article. References aren't extremely necessary as you can Click on the words to be directed to further information. --Chip123456 (talk) 16:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Why

I am again wondering why my edits were undone, they were correct. Maybe instead of you undoing them and warning me, you could of added the extra information instead of making me sound like a criminal! The edits were correct as I have done more research. If you have a problem with my edits just talk to me and then we can resolve the problem much more easily instead of having to make a big fuss over things. Other bits of advice advice you have given to me have been useful and you have also left good links, but next time there is a problem please just say. Thanks :). --Chip123456 (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Article Scotrail No Ticket

Hi I have tagged this article with deletion category G10 {{db-attack}}. Although it is only a page with a redirect to Linlithgow, I do not think the article title is appropriate. Thoughts? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 18:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Do you have an explanation?

[2] Malleus Fatuorum 21:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

yes, and I rolled back myself within seconds. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm maybe a bit overly sensitive to this sort of thing, but I know that your reverting of my topic will be used in evidence against me, because you're an admin and I'm not. Please try to be more careful who you fuck off in future. Malleus Fatuorum 21:55, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Look, I'm really sorry for doing that, I don't try to "fuck off" anybody, and I certainly don't target you. It was an accident, and you can see from the screengrab at right just how close those buttons are. This was, in fact, only my second mistake of the type described here.

I'm certainly not gathering evidence against you; but any admin who might be doing so will see my self-rollback immediately after that and, if they have any sense, realise that it was my error, not yours. If they don't realise that, point them right here. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

You have more faith in your fellow admins than I do. Malleus Fatuorum 22:14, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Chip123456

Howdy.

A few days ago, you started a thread on ANI - originally asking about 3RR, regarding Chippenham railway station and Chip123456 (talk · contribs).

In that thread, several people expressed concern about the editing of Chip123456.

The thread was archived. However, because Chip123456 has continued to edit in the same way, I've moved the thread out of the archive, given it a new heading, and added to it.

It is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Chip123456.

The thread now does not concern you directly; it's all about Chip123456. However, I thought I'd let you know that I'd re-opened the discussion. Best,  Chzz  ►  17:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Tis the season

MarnetteD | Talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec11}} to your friends' talk pages.

Many thanks for all your work here at WikiP. I hope that your first months as an admin have not bee to maddening. Have a wonderful 2012. MarnetteD | Talk 22:31, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

time for some stuff

one nom and a bit more for you. Hope you can support what I've posted and there's also something about Bristol Parkway above Liverpool Central, don't forget that too! Tez011 (talk) 14:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Vale of Rheidol Railway

Would you mind having a quick look over the Vale of Rheidol Railway page? I've made quite a few edits recently and started referencing. Another pair of eyes would be helpful!  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 14:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

weird coincidence

That was a weird coincidence. I was literally editing Jennifer Rizzotti, because an image had been inexplicably removed, and it reappeared, while I was editing.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 23:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Happy new year and we will see you contributing in 2012 of the new year. We are hoping to see and help to make Wikipedia better! Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 22:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

The Claws of Axos

Please don't simply undo edits because you have misunderstood. The note regarding the TARDIS doors in the Claws of Axos is perfectly correct. You may want to view your copy of the DVD to verify it before you rush to undo the redo. You may also want to check the reference. If you wish to amend the text to make it clearer, that is a separate issue; but undoing correct text is not very helpful at all. Doubtless this earns me a ban of some kind. TVArchivistUK (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

First off, I didn't undo. You added a whole paragraph, most of which I left alone - I removed one sentence and amended another. Second, I didn't necessarily misunderstand: but let's take that aspect to Talk:The Claws of Axos#TARDIS doors. Third, I shouldn't need to check my DVD, that is WP:OR. Fourth, http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Claws_of_Axos is a wiki, and is therefore inadmissible as a ref, see WP:USERG. Fifth, I can't ban you. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:14, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

You may want to view the trailer for the upcoming DVD release of The Sensorites. Or wait for the release itself next month. Either way, you will see another example of the TARDIS doors opening directly onto the exterior, sans any interim vestibule or corridor. Another example underlining The Claws of Axos' unique TARDIS configuration. TVArchivistUK (talk) 05:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

inneresting

Hi, do you use a tool for adding citations? The reason that I ask is that several of your recent edits, such as this one, are using the |access-date= parameter, which puts the page into hidden Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters. The correct parameter to use is |accessdate=. intriguing - will have to investigate - normally I use no tool as such - nothing like learning on the job - so to speak - have a good new year - cheers SatuSuro 00:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

ahah - I see now - Mr or Mrs Goliath territory - first lets follow the trail:

• http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/16898385?q=railways+western+australia&c=book
• down to editions/versions
• click on cite this
• look at cite this record
• look at wikipedia at the bottom

... as mr zimmerman used to sing it aint me babe, it aint me youre looking for - its the smarty who configured the java applet that sits in the bowels (or brains) of the trove catalogue... ( heheh I say that cause their disclaimer Citations are automatically generated and may require some modification to conform to exact standards makes me think that is a good cop out - or it means one has to manually change each new cite... oh dear thats a lot of cites i have slavishly added without checking.... ) but they're out to lunch like most of the world - till next week.. or as some might put it - next year

thank you very much for alerting me to the fact - apologies for the lengthy reply SatuSuro 00:22, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 12:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

maybe but there you are floating across my wart list (aka watch) cleaning up my refs - I think either you or I need to break the news to the trove programmers they got it wrong - HNY btw SatuSuro 00:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done have sent em a message - hope they change it - sometime this year - despite the disclaimer SatuSuro 01:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

apologies - hadnt looked close enough - not fixed yet then? SatuSuro 05:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Plaxton Panorama Elite

Hi Redrose64

Thanks for your recent additions and corrections to Plaxton Panorama Elite. I just wanted to query part of it, which goes against what I'd believed to be true - though I have no direct evidence with which to challenge it.

You mention "earlier models with shallow windscreen" and "later models with deeper windscreen". I had always been under the impression that (for standard width vehicles) the windscreens (and rear screens for that matter) were the same size and shape throughout the production run, from G-reg right through to P-reg. As for the position of the destination box - from observation, I had always thought it was determined by the chassis type, with front-engined Bedfords and Fords tending to have it between the headlights, whereas mid-engined Bedfords, Leopards and Reliances had it immediately below the windscreen where there was more space.

However, as all of this is largely OR (observations and word of mouth) and I can't find any sources to back me up, I thought I'd better consult with you before I made any changes! Where did you get your info and do you have any further details?

Best wishes, Quackdave (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

VIP Art Fair Wikipedia Page

Hi Redrose64 I am a Sotheby's Institute of Art grad student who is very familiar with VIP Art Fair and the recent developments at the company. Earlier today, I was attempting to update the file and may have jumped the gun by deleting the existing page. I was trying to update the information and take out both inaccuracies (ie VIP is not a virtual trade show but an art fair) and biases. I am clearly learning because my page was deleted within 5 minutes. I would like to repost but I do not want to cause further issues/harm. Please can you advise on the best course of action? Thank you, Evelyn96.239.59.144 (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The page VIP Art Fair has not been deleted. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, what I meant was that I deleted the previous post. And then the wrote in a new one. User MikeWazowski (not the original writer) then deleted mine, and put the former one back up and cited me for speedy deletion. I saw you had intervened so I was stepping away from the page for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.239.59.144 (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I didn't intervene. All I did was move the {{art-stub}} template to the bottom in line with WP:FOOTERS, and add a {{reflist}}. The latter was because either a {{reflist}} or a <references /> is mandatory for any article containing one or more <ref>...</ref> elements, and omission of that will cause the page to show in Category:Pages with missing references list.

As to removal of text that you entered, I suggest that you take up your concerns with the user who actually removed the content. You should be able to find out who that was by trying the "prev" links in the page history.

Regarding the speedy deletion request, according to the page history, the edit where speedy deletion was requested was this one made by MikeWazowski (talk · contribs), the edit summary of which states "Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G12). (TW)". If you follow the first of those two links, i.e. CSD G12, you'll see that MikeWazowski believes there to have been an "Unambiguous copyright infringement". Please bear in mind, that if true, such removal may have been right and proper per WP:COPYVIO. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Evelyn96.239.59.144 (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

London Undergound

The PMF saga continues. You commented on it at an earlier stage at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_Railways#London_Underground . The IP has now put in a defence at the talk page of London Underground itself. Your further input there would be appreciated if you have the time. -- Alarics (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Rochester railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rochester (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Redrose64 (talk) 12:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Elisabeth Sladen/GA1

I was just about to delete this, but I don't want to be accused of wheel-warring. Regardless of whether it's a test page, it has been created out of process. The reviewer is meant to create the page, and the reviewer is not allowed to be the same person as the nominator. This page was created by the nominator. A mistake has been made somewhere, but, in any case, this page should be deleted. J Milburn (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

OK... there doesn't seem to be anything at WP:GAN apart from "Do not start the review page yourself as this may lead other reviewers to believe that your nomination is already under review" and "you cannot review an article if you are the nominator or have made significant contributions to it prior to the review" - it doesn't say what to do if this does happen, so I've asked for advice at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#GA1 created improperly. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete it, explain to the creator what you've done? I don't really see why there needs to be a great amount of discussion about this, if I'm honest. I'm going to explain the situation to the nominator. J Milburn (talk) 21:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

This actually IS a test page, the GA nominator is not supposed to start the GA review page, as that will show him as reviewing the article on WP:GAN. Courcelles 22:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that G2 applies. G6 would be far better:

WP:CSD#G2: Test pages. A page created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions.

WP:CSD#G6: Technical deletions. Uncontroversial maintenance, ... This also includes pages unambiguously created in error

This page was clearly created in error, not as a test of Wikipedia functions. I have deleted it under G6, with additional reasoning given, see deletion log. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The nom can't start the GA page since it makes it appear that they are conducting their own review, which would obviously not be allowed. I presumed it was an accident, hence the G2, but I'll delete future instances as G6, since that's more accurate. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Eyemouth Railway Company

Could you take a look at Eyemouth branch and Eyemouth Railway Company. I move the former to the latter in line with other Historic Scottish Railway Companies, however the originator has reverted the REDIRECT now on the orginial article (include putting the errors I removed back in), and copied the same text into the other article. He has put a comment on my talk page, which I have responded to, however I would welcome your wisdom, that I am heading in the right direction, even though I still need to construct the RDT. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 13:00, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

It's a mess. Let's discuss at Talk:Eyemouth Railway Company. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

All I was trying to do was fill in the missing lines in Scotland. Now all the joy has been sucked out of that. Cheers Rsloch (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that was unfair. When people massively alter your articles without the courtesy of telling you have it rankles, but still I shouldn't have left the above. Rsloch (talk) 14:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Class 05

Hi! Just to let you know the Barclay 0-6-0s are NOT listed as Class 05 in either of Marsden's latest definitive works (2011, October and 2011, November). best, Sunil060902 (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't mean that they weren't so classified though: omission doesn't prove a negative. Perhaps Marsden has overlooked them, or has assumed that BR would never put two different designs into the same class. The fact that six British Rail Class D2/5 still existed when the list was published in July 1968, as opposed to just one British Rail Class D2/8 makes it hard to believe that BR would not have allocated a TOPS class to those that were numerically larger. All other types with locos still existing at that date were given a TOPS class.

I need to search out a contemporary copy of Railway Magazine. I do have one: it's a case of finding it. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, I have literally just emailed Mr. Marsden regarding this, and he has very kindly responded extremely rapidly. He says the following:

"The AB batch D2400-D2409 were not Class 05, this error was first seen in an enthusiasts book in the late 1960s but is incorrect, The 05 classification covers the Hunslet 0-6-0 locos in the D2550-D2618 series."

best, Sunil060902 (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Hello Redrose,

You were most helpful last night with regard to my question. I am sorry that I failed to pass an example over in time, but my typing was lost due to our conflicting editing, and by the time I re-did it you had probably retired to your bed.

This happened to me once before and each time I panicked and lost the lot. This time a bit appeared. (see Edit summary "Ooops, how did that get there?" by Vadmium)

I was instructed to "merge", but the Help page did not help me learn what I should do.

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The main information page is Help:Edit conflict. If you do get an edit conflict, you will see two edit windows; the upper one contains what the page has become since you started editing (but contains none of your edit), the lower one is the edit window that you have been typing into. The intention is that you compare one with the other, adjust the top one to match the bottom one, and then save. This can be difficult, especially since if you had chosen to edit one section, the top one will still contains the entire page whereas the bottom one will contain only the one section that you were editing. I normally find that it's usually easiest to:

• ignore the top one and go to the bottom one
• mark the text that you entered since you began that edit and copy that to clipboard
• use the "back" button on your browser to return to the page as it was before you began editing
• edit the same section again, paste in the text from your clipboard
• preview and save.

--Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

That is really clear and most helpful, especially the part about the two windows.

I shall copy this to my own page for ease of reference. All the best, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 19:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Quintinshill

Thanks. As the worst accident in the UK I'd really like to get this to GA or FA and some of these driveby uncited additions really bug me. NtheP (talk) 12:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

citation and date tags

Hi --

Thanks for correcting me on the appropriate use of the date/month/day/year parameters in the {{citation}} template. Do you know offhand when or where the use of "|month=|day=|year=" was deprecated in favor of "|date="? The {{citation}} documentation isn't clear on this point, and I'd like to update it with a link to the appropriate WP:MOS clause if I can. Thanks. —Tim Pierce (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The |day= parameter was valid but not deprecated for less than a year. It was added with this edit, but the template was altered to track its use with this edit, and the category used to track it was amended to Category:Pages containing cite templates with deprecated parameters with this edit. The intention of having three separate parameters was so that dates in refs could be formatted according to user prefs, but I believe that it consumed too much resources; as a result of this the feature was removed, thus eliminating the need for the three components of a date to be separately provided. Where only month and year, or year alone, are known, the use of |month=|year= is still valid.

See Template talk:Citation/Archive 3#Deprecated fields and other threads in that archive from around September 2009. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Also please note that per MOS:DATEUNIFY, the YYYY-MM-DD format is permitted for access dates, but not for publication dates which should be in the same format as the rest of the article. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for the pointers. —Tim Pierce (talk) 19:58, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Aldwych tube station

Noticed an oddity on Aldwych tube station this evening. The infobox has a platforms item. When I first read it I infered that platform 2 was open from 1907 to 1917, and platform 1 from 1917 to 1994. Yes I know that is a wrong interpretation, however if I can make this mistake so can others.

The answer, I thought of going into the Infobox ( {{Infobox closed London station}}) and using the "years" and "events" parameters for expand the history section to cover the various significant events. However on check the documentation for the template, I noted that this infobox does not have "years" and "events" parameters.

Thoughts?? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 19:04, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I have long considered expanding {{Infobox closed London station}} but when doing so I would like to incorporate the main features of both {{Infobox London station}} and {{Infobox UK disused station}}. I'm out most of today though (Southampton Model Railway Exhib). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at Wood Lane (Metropolitan line) tube station. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

That is better. Do we really need start and close dates when we can put a chronology in? In Wood Lane (Metropolitan line) tube station the closing date is given twice in the infobox. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 18:26, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Probably not. I left them in to give a comparison. Obviously the infobox will need to retain |start=|end= until everything is converted. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)