User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 2

Thanks for link to shortened footnotes

I didn't know about the shortened footnotes. I have had the problem of trying to cite the same book, but different pages, and wondering how to do this, and I had looked over the article Help:Footnotes until my eyeballs glazed over, so I added the section (from stuff I had found in an old Wikipedia paperback guide) but now that I saw the shortened footnotes section, maybe I'll figure out how to use those. Anyway, thanks.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

You can see them in action at NBR 224 and 420 Classes, which uses the {{sfn}} template for this purpose. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey, thanks, I like your sfn system better, and will try to use it from now on. By the way, your RR articles -- definitely cool. If I had more free time and infinite resources, I think I'd build a huge model RR setup somewhere in an abandoned building and charge admission.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

WP Stub Sorting in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Stub Sorting for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Clang!

Apologies for wasting your time over my Banbury/Bicester mixup. No need to reply. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

lipstick lesbian article

omg, thanks lol, I can't believe I missed that, I just saw the most recent edit and welcomed her, how embarassing -.-
--Mistress Selina Kyle ^{(Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉)} 16:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Question about WikiProject template logic

Greetings, I would like to add some logic to Template:WikiProject United States that will populate a category if an article has more than 1 WPUS template. Is there a way to do that? Thanks in advance. --Kumioko (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is no way of forming such a test using Wiki markup, so there is no way of putting such coding in the template itself. You probably need to raise a bot request, asking that all pages in Category:WikiProject United States articles be checked. If there were few such pages it would be simple enough to export the pages and check individually: but we're talking about 714,319 pages here. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Have now spotted why you want this: it's to aid in edits like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep partially. The logic I am using to merge the templates works pretty well most of the time but it misses some and I didn't always have it so there are some out there from before I added it. I can scan through the articles it just takes a day and a half to do it so I was hoping to create a category that would tell me the problem. No problem though, thanks for the help. --Kumioko (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Multiple issues template usage suggestion

I have started a discussion about making the Multiple issues template the new cleanup template here. Since you have edited this template several times in the past I thought you might have some insight into this idea. --Kumioko (talk) 20:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I did? Several times? I can't find even one. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh sorry I thought I saw your name there somewhere. Too many things going on I guesss. Feel free to comment anyway. --Kumioko (talk) 20:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Betamax

I was wondering if i could ask do you know if all Doctor Who Betamax's were 60 minutes long? or just The Brain of Morbius Thanks Sfxprefects (talk) 13:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

IIRC, Betamax editions were the same length as the corresponding VHS release. They normally came out at the same time, and had matching catalogue numbers: i.e. when Revenge of the Cybermen was released in November 1983, the VHS version was BBC Video BBCV2003, and the Betamax was BBC Video BBCB2003. Most early VHSs were 90 mins - the only reason that the Brain of Morbius was so short was that the Laserdisc version came out at the same time, see here. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course, another possible reason was the existence of a one-hour edit of TBoM which had been broadcast in the UK on 4 December 1976. In the 1970s, it was common practice for the BBC to lead in to the new season, and fill in gaps mid-season, with one or two repeats of stories from the last season or two. These repeats were often, but not always, edited down to make a single- or two-episode compilation:

• The Dæmons (1 x 90-min) 28 Dec 1971, leading in to the ninth season (started 1 Jan 1972)
• The Sea Devils (1 x 90-min) 27 Dec 1972, leading in to the tenth season (started 30 Dec)
• Day of the Daleks (1 x 60-min) 3 Sep 1973
• The Green Death (1 x 90-min) 27 Dec 1973, in the middle of The Time Warrior
• Planet of the Spiders (1 x 105-min) 27 Dec 1974, leading in to the twelfth season (started 28 Dec)
• The Sontaran Experiment (1x50-min) 9 July 1975
• The Ark in Space (1x70-min) 20 August 1975, leading in to the 13th Season (started 30 August)
• Genesis of the Daleks (1x90-min) 27 December 1975, Christmas break (between The Android Invasion, finished 13 Dec, and The Brain of Morbius, started 3 Jan 1976)
• Planet of Evil (4 episodes unedited) 5-8 July 1976
• Pyramids of Mars (1x 65-min) 27 Nov 1976, Christmas break (between The Deadly Assassin, finished 20 Nov, and The Face of Evil, started 1 Jan 1977)
• The Brain of Morbius (1x 60-min) 4 Dec 1976, Christmas break (between The Deadly Assassin, finished 20 Nov, and The Face of Evil, started 1 Jan 1977)
• The Deadly Assassin (4 episodes: 1 & 2 unedited, 3 & 4 edited for content) 4-25 Aug 1977, leading in to the 15th season (started 3 Sep)
• The Robots of Death (2 x 45-min) 31 Dec 1977, 1 Jan 1978, Christmas break (between The Sun Makers, finished 17 Dec 1977, and Underworld, started 7 Jan 1978)

From 1978 on, repeats were unedited. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Hello again. Your post is is causing some bells to ring in my memory.

1. One of the drawbacks to betamax (and the reason that VHS eventually took the market) was that it has a limited amount of time that could be recorded on it. I think that it was 60 minutes in its original format. Though I should add that I think that that they did produce some that could record longer times before their demise.
2. I vaguely remember reading that the TBoM was edited down due to its perceived violent content (the Mary Whitehouse effect if you will) though I am not sure whether that was for the BBC repeat or for the tape release.
3. All of the early tape releases (in either format) had the opening and closing credits between episodes cut out. This would take out several minutes from a story and if any other trims were made (I can remember that, for some odd reason, the tape for The Pyramids of Mars cut out the "inches on one side and centimeters on the other" line by the 4th Dr as he is using his scarf to try and figure out one of the puzzles) you might lose 15 minutes or more from a story. Fans (who equal buyers of course) hated this and they eventually stopped. TBoM did receive a second VHS release with the cut content restored but some of the early VHS releases didn't and we had to wait for the DVD release to get the stories in their original length - The Revenge of the Cybermen and The Day of the Daleks being the last two if memory serves.

As I say this is all coming from memory (as well as referring to the situation in the US) so if any of it misses the mark I know that your research skills are so topnotch that you will be able to correct it. I just thought I would add it to the conversation if it might help. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

The earliest Beta tapes were certainly limited to 60 mins, just as the earliest VHS tapes were limited to 120 min. The development of thinner base material allowed longer tapes, which is how VHS progressed to 180 and 240 minutes. Betamax similarly got thinner tapes, and a 90-minute Betamax tape was on the market in 1978. Since the BBC didn't start producing prerecorded home video cassettes (DW or otherwise) until 1983, the 90-minute format would have been well established by then. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Did Beta ever have the ability to record at different speeds that VHS had? Depending on the VHS tape machine the might have different initials but it I remember SP - 2 hours - EP - 4 hours - SLP - 6 hours. I know that I recorded my 1st serials at SLP to get more shows on each tape - which was fine at the time but lead to them being somewhat faded 15 years later - Thanks goodness DVDs and VIDFIRE came along to give us high quality recordings. Again I'm vaguely remembering that this was another reason the Beta faded from the market. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 17:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Stranraer railway station

Hi, can you please review Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Transport in Scotland#Stranraer railway station for me. Am I on the right track? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 21:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Broadheath

The current narrative in the box gives a false impression of the true usage of an appreciable part of the line from the station to Baguley. Would you care to add a suitable note at a point of your choice in the Broadheath article to cover the position. Otherwise over-strict rules end up with giving, by default, false info to Wikipedia readers. RuthAS (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Redrose - sorry I left message on yours - not mine! I'm not used to that modus operandii, I'm afraid. Just a quick question - I'm not now sure why (Altrincham) appears in the title. The station name seems to have been plain "Broadheath" in Bradshaws. What do you think? Thanks RuthAS (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Redrose64,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 03:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Job queue

You know a thing or two about this. We got over 1000 seconds lag on edits. Is the job queue stuck stuck stuck stuck? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Not entirely: slow, but not exceedingly so. The link in Help:Job queue shows a queue of between 3000 and 3000, mostly in the 2500-2700 range. At about 00:01 UTC today it was in the 6000-7000 range, so has definitely dropped in nine hours. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Unified login

I noticed your late post at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Unified login and added a reply. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

LCDR R class

Thank you for tidying the ref on LCDR R class. I don't know how to do it. Is there a tool for the purpose? Biscuittin (talk) 19:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

For the primary citation, using the {{cite book}} template, there are several tools but I don't want to recommend any because I never use them. I spend some of my time fixing up bad citations produced by external tools, but I don't know which tools those are: none of them leave a trail like "this citation was generated by xxxx".

Basically, I look at the documentation for {{cite book}}, copy a blank template from that and fill in the parameters. Some of those on the doc page are so obscure that they're best ignored, so here's a blank template containing those parameters which I do use:

{{cite book |last1= |first1= |last2= |first2= |last3= |first3= |editor1-last= |editor1-first= |editor2-last= |editor2-first= |title= |edition= |year= |origyear= |publisher= |location= |isbn= |ref=harv }}

Most are self-explanatory.

The |lastn=|firstn= are for the authors. You can have up to nine pairs.

Similarly, |editorn-last=|editorn-first= are for the editors, but with a maximum of four pairs.

|year= is for the copyright year; |origyear= is used for the year of first publication if that is different from the copyright year, and in such cases |edition= is used to show which edition was consulted.

|location= is the place where the publisher is based.

|ref=harv is necessary when short footnotes are produced from {{sfn}}, {{harvnb}} and related templates. If you're not using those, |ref=harv doesn't do anything visible but is harmless.

Regarding short footnotes: I know of no tools which generate those. But they're not difficult to put together - consider the following:

<ref>Smith 1994, p.25</ref> →

This generates a shortened footnote which is entirely plain text

<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1994|p=25}}</ref> →

This uses {{harvnb}} to generate a shortened footnote which contains a link from Smith 1994 to the matching {{cite book}} (assuming that the latter has |ref=harv

{{sfn|Smith|1994|p=25}} →

Visually this is identical to the last one, but you don't need to use <ref>...</ref> tags because those are built into {{sfn}}. It really comes into its own when you have multiple instances of the same ref - you don't need to worry about <ref name=something> - all that is worked out for you.

The bluelinks of the last two will both take you to the following:

• Smith, Martin (1994). Steam on the Underground. Ian Allan Publishing. ISBN 0711022828. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

--Redrose64 (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

lana del rey born to die review

Just wanted to check why one review in the Independent is given preference over another, you have made a correction stating: review is already listed at position 4, with the true rating of 5/5

One rating is no more 'TRUE' than the other could you explain

Deneuve15 (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/album-lana-del-rey-born-to-die-interscopepolydor-6295631.html

If you examine edit , you'll see that the source for the review at position 11 is <ref name="independent">. This means that somewhere else in the article there is a full ref with the same name; and further up, at position 4, we find the following:

| rev4Score = {{Rating|5|5}}<ref name=independent/>

The review at position 11 therefore has the same source as the one at position 4. In the rendered page, this is shown as ^[34], clicking that takes you to the references section where the linekd URL is http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/album-lana-del-rey-born-to-die-interscope-6296383.html which awards five stars, not two. That is therefore not a valid source for your 2/5.

Also please note that per Template:Album ratings, reviews should be listed alphabetically. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Final request for Template:Canada

I think this is the last time I have to impose upon you for help with {{WikiProject Canada}}. I could not in good conscience go ahead with the name of the project as Wikipedia:WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador/St. John's. It's not a subpage of Newfoundland. It's more a child of Canada not the province. I've just subscribed the project to Article Alerts copying the values from the Canadian music project. I figured that any complaints of the move to the new name, I'd bare. The final thing is the actual banner as displyed. I completely forgot as I was having a prolonged "todo" with the category project with regard to them deleting one of them on me! lol. The project name in the Canada banner points to the previous name. It should be Wikipedia:WikiProject St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. I don't know whether there are other parameters you must change to make it happen. Thanks for all your help. Argolin (talk) 08:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that this should do it. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks alot! Its really nice that I can ask for something and it gets done. You're spoilling me. All the best. Argolin (talk) 11:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh!: Bonds Beyond Time

You know the guy that's vandalizing? Well, you can report him at WP:ANI. Glad to help, 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012

Hi Red Rose,

Looking at your recent edits on Chippenham railway station, I think you made a slight mistake. I totally agree with that the electrification ref, there is not enough to support it but the AfA scheme there is. It shows where it's happening and when you click on the wheelchair sign it gives you full information on it. I have moved the not in citation given, but if you feel you would like it back please tell my why! Have a good day! --Chip123456 (talk) 09:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Redrose64 was correct to apply the templates. Your citations need to be as specific as possible - I have now linked to new pages - and really should be formatted with the appropriate {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}} template. --Bob Re-born (talk) 10:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Luddite comes forward

After at least trying out the new variant of the citation/bibliographic templates, I would like to find a template that will output in Modern Language Association (MLA) format rather than the present APA style. My main reservation is the placement of the date with the publication date, a |PublicationDate= parameter that does not seem to indicate date(s) of publication next to publisher, rather it places it in the author field. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC).

That I don't know. Have you tried asking at WT:CITET? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that seems to be the great bugaboo, as the APA guide seems to be the only style that is being accommodated, yet the MLA style is widely used in publishing as it is the standard for the Humanities. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC).

Help request

Jbrock327 would like your help. Jbrock327 (talk) 05:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

What sort of help are you looking for? Have you posted a message somewhere else and wish to draw my attention to that? --Redrose64 (talk) 09:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't get it

There's one thing I don't understand: how could the staff at Swindon works cut up the almost preserved class 22 by accident? 98.177.248.237 (talk) 23:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

They were probably given an instruction to cut up a different locomotive, but for some reason cut D6319 instead (withdrawn September 1971, the cut date was November 1972). Possible reasons could include: they were told to cut up a loco on a particular siding, but got the wrong siding; they were told to cut up the loco at one end of a particular siding, but got the wrong end; they were given the number of the loco to cut, but misread it. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:38, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Just to say thank you for your wikignoming - I often see you tidying up after me! Secretlondon (talk) 03:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Responding to edit requests

Hi, I noticed that you responded to several {{editsemiprotected}}'s. I'm not sure if you realized it, but after answering one, you're supposed to change it to {{editsemiprotected|answered=yes}} so that it doesn't show up in Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests. Also, technically you're supposed to use {{ESp}} instead of {{EP}}, but I honestly doubt anyone cares about this distinction. Thank you. --NYKevin @967, i.e. 22:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I realised about the {{ESp}} just before I did this one. I have noticed that some other users leave |answered=no alone if there is a possibility that with further information, the request could become valid. In this case I felt that there was no such possibility. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Editors are able to mark something as unanswered if they come up with the needed information. Since an unanswered request will show up in the category, it is usual to mark it answered unless you think your response is insufficient or want someone to look it over. --NYKevin @980, i.e. 22:31, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Class 458

Thank you for supporting me in this RfC. Is there any way you can get more people to take part? It might look like inappropriate canvassing if I start approaching people. It may appear to be an esoteric question to do with a particular class of rolling stock and not of general interest, but the issue is actually much more fundamental, viz. whether an editor should be able to overturn properly sourced information which he or she happens not to like. Thanks -- Alarics (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hull and Barnsley Railway

Hi there. I see you have restored the wikilink for Edward Watkin. I was about to do it this morning then realised it might not be the Edward Watkin of the article, but his nephew. Chevin (talk) 15:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, good point. I have now followed the link again and seen the hatnote. I rather think that Watkin (junior) is best dealt with on a biog article (maybe the same article as Watkin (senior)), not on the H&BR article. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Chippenham station, explanation to your edit summary.

Hi, the information on the reference you were looking for is near the bottom. Hope you can now find it. Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Many thanks for answering queries on my talk page! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Fenchurch St

Sorry for the page move, didn't realise there was a set of guidelines regarding railway station article titles. Thanks for reverting. --TBM10 (talk) 21:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

GNR Class C1 (Klondyke)

Thanks for your addition to GNR Class C1 (Klondyke). I am thinking of renaming the article, see Talk:GNR Class C1 (Klondyke). What is your view on this? Biscuittin (talk) 22:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Location map help

hi, i saw some of your comments on the location map page and am assuming you have some knowledge about it. how do i make a name appear on mouseover to a marker:

you can see my code here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Misconceptions2/sandbox, it has a part which says "link=Rayyis", but it does not say rayyis on mouse over to the marker which has the label=Exp. of Zaid ibn Haritha (Al-Is)--Misconceptions2 (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Multiple post. Have responded at User talk:Misconceptions2#Location maps. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:19, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking the time to track down the italictitle situation on The Five Doctors article. My guess was that it was something along those lines but I wouldn't have known where to begin to track it down. I appreciate your thoroughness. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 03:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

You've probably already seen it but just in case DonQuixote fixed the italics situation. It's always good to know that there are other editors that can fix things. Have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 15:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Locomotives

I think you've got an edit war brewing at LMS Hughes Crab. Thanks for your additions to LSWR K10 class and LSWR L11 class. I only added the Dendy Marshall reference so I can't help with page numbers for the others. I have also created LSWR C8 class and, if you could add further information to it, this would be most welcome. Biscuittin (talk) 10:43, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

He's claiming "Someone has undone the changes I made yesterday, which is somewhat annoying. I am an authority on the subject which the other contributor obviously isn't" which is somewhat annoying to me too: how do I know that he's "an authority on the subject"; and why am I "obviously" not? He's also dismissing my sources out of hand, which include the writing of Bob Essery, possibly the best living authority on LMS locos.

Anyway. Page numbers: I realise that you didn't add those refs - I'm hoping that the person who did will see these tags can add the pages. I only have one of these books myself - Brian Haresnape's "Drommond Locomotives" - and the stated fact (about black and white lining) I just can't find in there. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:23, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your clear revert edit summary. It helps understand what I've done wrong (Chippenham station)

--Chip123456 (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012 - BRI

you seem to be good friends with bob re born but I hope you can assist me with my problem with him. My edits on Temple Meads station, Bristol are I believe correct user bob re born keeps on reverting them. Please can you see which is correct and bring this dispute to an end! Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 20:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Such matters are best discussed on the article's talk page, Talk:Bristol Temple Meads railway station - see also WP:BRD. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Also see WP:3RR - the line is dangerously close at present. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. I didn't discuss the matter with bob a lot as he comes across quite aggressively. --Chip123456 (talk) 07:47, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Stalking

How did you come to watch my talk page? Have we met somewhere on wikipedia? Thanks for helping. You work trains and I work plants, so I was curiuos.512bits (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I have Preferences → Watchlist → Add pages I edit to my watchlist turned on, so here's how. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah. I'd forgotten that was you, but not the help you gave there. I'm using that sfn stuff in Botany improvement.512bits (talk) 23:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

See here. I did better on the trichomes (hairs) than I thought. 512bits (talk) 02:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

re: Wikipedia:Redirect

I know. Headbomb and I are both up against that rule right now. I have been trying, without success so far, to engage in a constructive discussion of the true intent of his/her change. It is possible, even likely, that this is a misunderstanding of intent. That should be fully sorted out on Talk before the content is re-added, however. Perhaps you can help mediate this discussion where I have been unsuccessful. Thanks. Rossami (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Wiki

Can't you post any website links on Wikipedia then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexpotter1996 (talk • contribs) 22:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

It depends what they are. See WP:LINKSTOAVOID, particularly item 10. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikicite/doc

Hi. I'm fine with the tweaks for {{wikicite/doc}}. But in a recent FA, I recall nikkimaria calling for consistency between sfn'd footnotes and the full cite, so .27.27 went in. You wouldn't know a way to do this without having to encode the apostrophes in the {{sfnRef}} would you? (fyi, the example is off Woodes Rogers.) Alarbus (talk) 01:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Moved to Template talk:Sfn § Title-Date with wiki markup in link

 – --Redrose64 (talk) 13:29, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

User script listing cleanup project

I'm leaving this message for known script authors, recent contributors to Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts, and those who've shown interest in user scripts.

This scripts listing page is in dire need of cleanup. To facilitate this, I've created a new draft listing at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts cleanup. You're invited to list scripts you know to be currently working and relevant. Eventually this draft page can replace the current scripts listing.

If you'd like to comment or collaborate on this proposal, see the discussion I started here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts#Scripts listing cleanup project. Thanks! Equazcion ^(talk) 04:31, 25 Mar 2012 (UTC)

Never written a user script in my life. Did manage to crash Netscape Navigator 4 once, by feeding it a chunk of javascript copied straight out of a textbook, not realising that it was intended for Internet Explorer 5. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:07, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit to Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedians by number of edits

Hi, I've just noticed my edit [1] from early on Saturday morning, which you reverted. It's a bit mystifying as I didn't intend to make any such edit. I think it must have been because I was viewing the wiki on my smart phone, and accidentally hit the "rollback" button when trying to click some other link. Silly thing is I didn't even notice it had happened until today. Thanks for catching it, anyway!  — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia School Project

Hello! I am in a college English course and working on a Wikipedia article for an assignment. I was wondering if you would have any suggestions for me to improve my page? Also, There is a box at the top of the page that says the article does not cite any sources, even though I have added citations. Is there a way I can fix this? Thanks so much!Aprose793 (talk) 01:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Midland trainspotting

Johnson class 3P

Can't help with the 0-6-0s I'm afraid, and there's plenty more unidentified at Commons:Category:Midland Railway steam locomotives

Here's another I couldn't identify: File:Bournville Locomotive Depot, with Midland 4-4-0 - geograph.org.uk - 2123308.jpg It's easy to identify it - Casserley & Asher give it as Johnson Class 3, 40711-430762, 22/80 surviving in 1948, but I'm not sure what the class would have been called otherwise, cf. the "Class 483" 4-4-0s. Did they begin at 700? Andy Dingley (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

No, the locos which were 700-709 after 1907 were the 2606 Class of 1900-01 (Derby O/1869); 745 is of the 2781 Class (built 1902-04 in five orders), which after 1907 were 710-749. Prior to rebuilding with the G8As boiler, the 2606 Class had the GX boiler (barrel 10'6" long) whilst the 2781 Class had the G8 boiler (barrel 11'0" long). This difference may account for the difference in the wheel spacing: although both had a loco wheelbase of 23'2+1⁄2", the second axle was six inches further forward on the 2781 Class. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Present

Present for you on my user page.512bits (talk) 16:57, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Rail link

Dear Redrose 64,

I have considered your edits of Statford upon Avon to Honeybourne, is is not the case that there is a future possible link between the two lines are currently under investigation for funding? I will be pleased to hear your deliberations on the matter in question.

Thank you,

IkbenFrank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IkbenFrank (talk • contribs) 08:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for speculation or original research. All claims must be backed up by reliable sources, per the policy on verifiability. If there is a firm plan to reopen the route, which has been proposed either by the various county councils, by Network Rail, or by a train operating company, and such project has been described in a reliable news source (such as The Railway Magazine or Modern Railways) it may then be mentioned along with suitable references. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Uttoxeter

Following on from conversation last year, see update at User talk:Lamberhurst#Uttoxeter station revisited. NtheP (talk) 12:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Stub categories

FYI: <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=486028176&oldid=485971510>. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Cite date and year

Looks like the issue with a year in the date field was fixed. See Help talk:Citation Style 1#date and year. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Oxford

Re this edit - under which part of WP:TPO did you remove my post? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

soz, that was a accidental mistake and you have my full apology. Twobells (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Titanic

Redrose, are you connected with the GWS at Didcot? The latest issue of Heritage Railway (12 Apr - 9 May) has an illustration of an Edmondson ticket printed in advance for use by passengers returning to the UK on Titanic for their onward train journeys to London. The article mentions various tickets surviving. Do you think that the GWS would be amenable to making scans of the tickets available via Commons. As far as I understand it, the tickets are ineligible for copyright. Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a member; I'll try to find somebody who is. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Chippenham to Wales

Hi,

Please note that the Wales is a main service but just has a limited service. (CPM). --Chip123456 (talk) 10:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

London Paddington/Supertramp

I have re-worded the sentance and added a citation though I can't help feeling that It does not need to be in the article. Long Robin 79 (talk) 10:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Car trim level articles

Hi, while I was looking at these new page creations you CSD'd (G4) this page, Trim level acronym, are you aware that hte user also created Car trim level acronym as well, which is an exact copy of the page you have tagged? I'll let you deal with this. Cheers! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 20:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Both of them went to AFD, and one closed as speedy delete per WP:CSD#A10, whilst the other is still open. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Err this user is going bananas and could do with a block, methinks, the second article I linked to is a another clone of the Car Acronym article, so I just tagged it with a WP:CSD#A10. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 20:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012 help

Hi, I need your help. I'm currently reviewing Notodden Airport, Tuven which is situated in Norway. A vast majority of the sources are in Norwegian but the article is in English. So, can I verify reliability from a language of which I don't speak. The nominator recommended that I should use google translate, which I'm not comfortable using because sometimes it has very poor translating skills! What can I do? HELP! Thanks -------Chip123456 (talk) 20:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Although I do have a small Norsk-Englisch dictionary, and have made some edits to Norwegian Wikipedia, I can't read the language without considerable help. I would suggest going to WP:RFT, or you could try directly asking one of the editors listed at Wikipedia:Translators available#Norwegian-to-English - I'm not going to recommend one, because I don't recall ever dealing with these people. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, so can they be accepted on the English Wikipedia? --Chip123456 (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The relevant policy is at WP:NONENG so it's not for me to judge whether these specific sources are acceptable or not. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

^ {{cite web |url=http://radiostationworld.com/locations/united_states_of_america/michigan/radio.asp?m=por |title=RadioStationWorld |year=2012 |accessdate=16 April 2012

Right thank you. Also what is wrong with the way the above reference has come out in the reference section? It doesn't look right! --Chip123456 (talk) 16:38, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The reference section of which article? I don't see it in Notodden Airport, Tuven. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, should've said. Sarnia by user TheKurgan, another article I'm reviewing. --Chip123456 (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The closing braces were missing on the {{cite web}} template.

More worrying is that the reference numbers don't correspond: the offending ref is numbered in the text (whose refs go up to but 78 in the References section (these go up to 84). Somehow 18 refs in the main text are not showing in References. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I thought that too, but didn't realise it was so many, thought my computer was just playing up! Will put it on the review page. Thanks Redrose, you are really helpful and a credit to Wikipedia, may sound a bit cheesy but it's true! --Chip123456 (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I have found several other instances where the two closing braces were missing, or one opening brace was missing; also one case where a single closing brace had been used instead of a double closing square bracket. I've fixed these up as well, and this appears to have fixed the numbering problem at the same time. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Right, well that is odd! Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Masturbation

Would the reference to Freud's views on masturbation be ok now since I have provided sources now?--RJR3333 (talk) 06:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Spearhead From Space

The data as to the broadcast schedule for Dr Who ALREADY exists on wikipedia. If you click on every story page which exists - and they all do - you will be shown the broadcast dates for every episode, including the 8 episodes that were repeated (An Unearthly Child (pt 1) & the complete Evil of the Daleks) prior to the Spearhead from Space repeat in 1971. Every broadcast date corresponds with a Saturday. It is not necessary to provide a citation when the information exists already on wikipedia. It is only necessary when there is no other supporting record and an external verification is needed. The citation that you demanded does prove that the repeat took place on Friday evenings and all the other Dr Who story pages combined verify that this was the first example of a non-Saturday broadcast. TVArchivistUK (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary: Wikipedia is not a reliable source, see WP:CIRCULAR. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your personal vendetta and your determination to escalate an edit war.

What vendetta? Please see WP:NPA and WP:V, also WP:NOR. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your personal vendetta and your determination to escalate an edit war. Please see your previous edits.

Which specific edits are you having trouble with? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your personal vendetta and your determination to escalate an edit war. Please see your previous edits.

Robots of Death

If you click on the wikilink to Pamela Salem or indeed to the page for the character 'Leela' you will see all the sources needed. Notes that are verified by wikipedia do not need further external sources.TVArchivistUK (talk) 02:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary: Wikipedia is not a reliable source, see WP:CIRCULAR. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Once again you have misunderstood and once again your personal vendetta and determination to prove that you are the ultimate authority on Dr Who has let you down. The pages I referred to all carried the SOURCED and VERIFIED data you had demanded. Thus by clicking the pages, the source was clear and verified. You are (again) making a mockery of the entire wikipedia project and indeed your personal vendetta's against editors is making it a miserable environment for everyone.

WoEML

(WoEML=West of England Main Line) If it were like that, it would mean that South West Trains services would have to reverse when they used to operate to Paignton, Plymouth and Penzance. It does not mention the trains reversing on any article. Pdiddyjr (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The thing is, they did reverse, since the track configuration in the Exeter area does not permit any other movement. See rail atlases such as

• Yonge, John (2005) [1989]. Jacobs, Gerald (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 3: Western (4th ed.). Bradford on Avon: Trackmaps. map 7A. ISBN 0-9549866-1-X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
• Baker, Stuart K. (2010) [1977]. Rail Atlas Great Britain & Ireland (12th ed.). Hersham: Oxford Publishing Co. p. 3, section A1, A2. ISBN 978-0-86093-632-9. 1010/C. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

What Wikipedia says, or doesn't say, about reversing is irrelevant, because Wikipedia is not a reliable source. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The South West Trains Network map says that Exeter St Davids is not on a north-south arrangement like that. And it does not say that trains between Exmouth and Paignton reverse. And there would be no reversing, otherwise the principle fast services from London to Paignton would never have been operated from London Waterloo by South West Trains. Pdiddyjr (talk) 11:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Which South West Trains Network map? Can you provide a URL to that? If it is a topological map, there is no obligation for it to be geographically correct.

Here is an Ordnance Survey map centred on Exeter St Davids (indicated by the figure 1 on an orange disc). Railways are shown as thick solid black lines, and stations by magenta rectangles or circles. As is usual with O.S. maps, north is at the top and geographic relationships are maintained, so a line going straight up and down is a north-south line. The railway line going to the north (i.e. straight up) forks about two squares up from Exeter St Davids: the left-hand fork goes to Barnstaple; the right goes to Taunton and London Paddington (also Bristol and Birmingham). There is a second fork immediately south of Exeter St Davids: the gently-curving line going to the south is the line to Newton Abbot and Paignton (also Plymouth and Penzance); whilst the other line, which curves sharply east, is the line to Yeovil, Salisbury and Waterloo.

Many fast trains reverse en route; for example, CrossCountry have trains such as the 05:11 Manchester Piccadilly-Bournemouth which reverses at Reading, and the 06:01 Sheffield-Reading which reverses at Birmingham New Street. They even have services such as the 06:15 Leeds-Southampton Central which reverse at both Birmingham New Street and Reading. These, and several others, are shown on National Rail Table 51; yet this does not describe any reversal because it's not really relevant to a person planning a journey. The National Rail map of those routes shows the routes as running straight through both Reading and Birmingham New Street. The same map also implies that Birmingham-Bristol services calling at Gloucester do not reverse there; and that Birmingham-Nottingham services need not reverse at Derby. But if you actually travel on any of these routes, the reversal always happens. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. TVArchivistUK (talk) 16:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Have you reported me yet? --Redrose64 (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Redrose, I have posted a warning on the above users talk page for using the warning templates inappropriately, I can see that you are trying to help. It's a shame not all users think the same. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I don't want the above user getting worried after another user posted quite a worrying comment on their TP. I was wondering if you could just tell them not to get worried, I would but I think hearing from someone with more seniority on Wikipedia would be more comforting. Thank you. --Chip123456 (talk) 18:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm really unsure how to handle this. We have at least two editors who seem to think that Wikipedia is a good place to post interesting information, but don't wish to show their sources. This, to me, doesn't satisfy WP:V and possibly not WP:NOR; but when I try to explain this they seem to take this as some kind of mental deficiency on my part. One of these seems to have woken up after four months away just to express views about me. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, when I gave the above user advice he/she also said to me on this talk page history that I was abusive. I understand how hard it is for you now (which notably I didn't used to!) I think maybe if we express that their information is useful and is good to have on Wikipedia, we may be able to convince them to cite their edits. If they believe their edits are good I believe/hope they will put more effort into citing. Does this make sense?!--Chip123456 (talk) 19:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The edits were cited. In one case, the edit was not specifically cited on the page in question, but a wikilink was provided to the page where the reference was located. My problem is that instead of helping articles by perhaps searching for a reference yourself where you are not satisfied with what has been provided, instead you simply delete (as you've done in the past) or on this occasion, cite. You clearly follow all my edits and are tracking what I do, since everytime I make a contribution to Dr Who, within minutes, you've amended, deleted or cited it. If that isn't evidence of a vendetta, then I don't know what is. In the past you have made completely dishonest and misleading statements to counteract my correct edits. For example: "In the Classic Series stories, console room doors don't open directly to the exterior. Right from the start, they opened into a sort of passageway, and the console room doors are seen to have roundels on both sides." This was not true, as any cursory glance of some of the very earliest episodes proved quite easily. Yet you stated it as a reason for deleting my edits. When I see something on wikipedia that needs a reference, I go and look for one and add it if I can find it. If I can't, I leave well alone unless it's something that's blatant vandalism or simple ridiculous. Your pal MarnetteD edits in the same way that you do. On one occasion, they wrote (not on something I had contributed) that they had seen the relevant episode and the clip being referred to did not exist. It took me less than 30 seconds to source a reference for the page, which I added and thus proved that MarnetteD had no clue what they were saying. Yet, they had deleted the correct edit rather than helping source the correct edit. When I pointed out it would be more helpful to add rather than delete, I got a poisonous rant in return. With behaviour like that and from yourself, you wonder why folks are making warnings about your mental health. You found sources for the edits I had made and eventually added them. You could have done that from the beginning, but instead, you decided to start and escalate an edit war. Your train spotting buddy throwing in threats did nothing to help either. Please also do not edit correct references as you did on the Robots of Death page. The edits you made were incorrect and have now been reversed. The production notes that are included by the BBC research team on the DVDs is not hearsay. That they are sometimes confirmed verbally in the commentary only strengthens the argument and thus is noted separately. If a reference was ONLY mentioned in the commentary, then yes, it could be construed as hearsay and not a valid reference, but that is not what was claimed. I am done with this matter now. My goal was to enhance a page with an historical fact and a unique broadcast detail. I am sorry you and MarnetteD do not agree. You are not the owners of Dr Who in wikipedia and the very nature of the site will always and should always encourage editors to add production notes that may interest the wider audience. That they do not necessarily interest either of you is not relevant. Please do not cite wiki rules at me at this stage about what is acceptable and what isn't. They can be interpreted many ways and your interpretation is no more valid than mine. TVArchivistUK (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

You clearly follow all my edits and are tracking what I do, since everytime I make a contribution to Dr Who, within minutes, you've amended, deleted or cited it. Prove it: preferably in the investigation against me (which I haven't found yet). --Redrose64 (talk) 11:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

TVArchivistUK, there is a difference between following an editor from one article to another for harassment and "correcting related problems on multiple articles". The former is hateful but the latter is laudable. There are proper avenues for redress listed at that link. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Redrose, also note I was looking for the investigation of you and I did see some of the users contributions to see if I could find it, but there was nothing there to suggest that the user had reported you. --Chip123456 (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

New photo

I have a more recent photograph of Selling railway station which reflects the new shelters and paint scheme - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Selling_railway_station,_Kent_-_2012.jpg

As I'm new and not really sure of the norm (and as you have quite a few edits on that page) I thought it would be best to run it by you before including it (should I leave the old one on there as well if so?) Almostdecimal (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

It does look like a better image, so I've updated it. The best place for proposals like this is on the article's talk page - in this case Talk:Selling railway station. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I now see it is more important to have a more elaborate intro re usage of the term and its context rather than a move- thanks SatuSuro 22:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Default image size - rhayader and kidsgrove railway stations

could you pls indicate which part of WP:IMAGE controls the size of the images I have been inserting. The default you are using seems a bit small to me, also not very tidy. Thanks Flying Stag (talk) 11:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:IMAGE#Image syntax shows the normal syntax:

[[File:Example.png|thumb|alt=Example alt text|Example caption]]

Notice the presence of |thumb| and the absence of anything setting an explicit size. In the next subsection, there are guidelines on forced image size, which has a further link to Image use policy on displayed image size. The main thing is that unless there is a good reason to force an image size, it's not normally desirable to do so. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:35, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reply. I speed read WP:IMAGE but somehow missed this. As an aged and permanent newbie I'm amazed I haven't been picked up on this before (you may like to go and review my contribs!) Flying Stag (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

3RR Warning.

Hey ! I just read your message. Just a thing to let you know I use the talk's page. AdamDeanHall doesn't. And I'm the only one who is punished ? ... 109.214.216.3 (talk) 23:40, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I've not punished you, I've served a warning. I could have gone straight for the block button, because you've made at least five reverts to each one of those articles in less than one hour (see WP:3RR). --Redrose64 (talk) 23:47, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

And AdamDeanHall ? Not a warning ? Cause he SO MUCH needs it. I have a warning, well, okay, obviously, this is those who are right you have a warning, I deal with it cause i'm an IP, but ADAMDEANHALL thinks he's god. PLEASE. 109.214.216.3 (talk) 00:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You shouldn't beg other users to warn him/her, only because you got a warning doesn't mean the other editor automatically gets one (See WP:WIN). Redrose isn't trying to punish you in anyway, just trying trying to give you some advice, as said, getting involved in the war can lead to a high percentage of editors being blocked, you are lucky because you didn't revert 3 times but 5. I would just forget about it now, and move on BUT when you are contributing on Wikipedia always keep WP:3RR in mind when editing. --Chip123456 (talk) 16:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Removing trailing spaces from headers

Uh... thank you for pointing it out! Nevertheless, I guess there is no need for a massive bot correction, right? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 08:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

The Twinkle is not so bright!

Hi, I'm having problems with Twinkle at the moment, also it is not letting me do edit summary. My twinkle is not showing and the same as my edit summary, any idea what could be wrong? Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely no idea - I never use Twinkle. However, I do know that MediaWiki 1.20 has just rolled out (at approx 18:30 UTC, which is 19:30 British time), which may cause unexpected effects. It's certainly made the diffs change solour & style. Try posting at WT:TW; if they can't help, try WP:VPT. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, will do. Thanks.--Chip123456 (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Its not just me, there are others experiencing the same issue. My edit summary is back now, taking it one step at a time. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

It's working! --Chip123456 (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Aluminium/Aluminum

Though Aluminium is the preferred spelling in chemistry related articles regardless of English variants, aluminum is still the preferred spelling for non-chemistry-related topics in a North American context. Please don't change the spelling in non-chemistry-related contexts (as you did at American Airlines Flight 11) unless the rest of the article is already composed in UK usage. See WP:ALUM. Acroterion (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry! It goes the other way too - I've seen people altering sulphur to sulfur for non-chemistry articles on a primarily British topic. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem - I've seen everything that can be done: one of my watchlisted items is Orange (colour), and it gets hit all the time by people who don't know that there is a UK spelling, and that it's perfectly fine to have it spelled/t that way without the wiki exploding. Cheers, Acroterion (talk) 20:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Keighley and Worth Valley Railway

Hi, I've been editing the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway article. Just been working on the track diagram template, and was wondering if you could give me a hand? Basically, I think it's too wide and I'm not sure how to reduce the width. I think that the best way is to spread the long annotations (about the final destinations of lines, etc) accross multiple lines but doing this manually seems horrendously untidy? I also think that there's a case for putting a couple of the annotations (for example the 'to Keighley goods yard' annotations) on the left, but I'm also unsure on this too. Thanks in advance MR7526 (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

To Skipton & The North Site of original Keighley Station To Leeds, Bradford Forster Square & The South To Keighley Goods Yard To Queensbury, Bradford Exchange & Halifax Damems (Request Stop)

There's an awful lot of detail in {{Keighley and Worth Valley Railway}}; RDTs don't normally show so much. However, dealing with the specific problem of the width, I see two rows that are significantly wider than the others. For these, we may use the {{BSsplit}} construct: but bear in mind that this isn't satisfactory on all browsers, or at certain zoom levels. See right for a demonstration; I've put some of the medium-length rows in too, without altering them, by way of comparison. Since I've removed most of the rows (those with shorter text), this means that the route lines don't line up as seen here, but if you copy just those two lines into Template:Keighley and Worth Valley Railway, it should significantly reduce the width. Also please note that I've amended "Interchange" to "Exchange", to suit both the name and location as they existed when the ex-GNR Bradford-Keighley route was still open. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

That's great, thanks. I've tried to be detailed, and looking at other preserved railways (NYMR for example), it seems about the same level of detail. WRT Bradford Exchange, that seems sensible. MR7526 (talk) 18:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

for wrestling with my Jack Simmons references. I'll get the hang of it soon. Bmcln1 (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Getting sorted

I guess the TB project is getting sorted -- FYI, I wasn't undoing your changes, I had multiple windows open and got confused as to what I had or had not been working on. You know what you are doing, as long as it all works, I'm probably done futzing with all of this. Montanabw^(talk) 02:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Are you still a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Labels?

If so, then you need to place this userbox, {{User WikiProject Record Labels}}, somewhere on your user page. If not, please remove your name from here or I will do it for you in a weeks time (May 14, 2012). Devin (talk) 05:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done - I thought that this was sufficient. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

New message

Hey dude, you have new message on. User_talk:Aris_riyanto#Interlanguage_links. Thanks Aris riyanto (talk) 01:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Policy

Hi, I need to find a policy to cite to another user but can't locate it. The one where it says you can't have lots of coloured writing in bus route lists. We've both combatted this before so I should know! Thanks, Rcsprinter (talk to me) 18:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I usually direct people to WP:COLOUR. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Of course, that's it! Btw, sorry for editing your page 200 times, edit button kept giving me an error message, didn't realise I was making edits as well. Rcsprinter (state) 19:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Cleanup bots

OK, so the last bit that seems to be needed is a cleanup of the cleanup bots. See here. I won't screw with this, but someone needs to. Montanabw^(talk) 01:13, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

As stated at the top of User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates, "The bot works only if you give it your project's main template, not a redirect version.", so this edit was necessary. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I give up. Totally, I'll do content, let others deal with this syntax stuff. Montanabw^(talk) 05:59, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Test, let me know if you get a you have new messages bar on my talk page please. The Helpful One 15:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Running self-test. --Redrose64a (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

RAF Raydon

Hello Redrose64, I am not sure that your 'fix' on Hardeligh Railway,Capel and Raydon Wood for RAF Raydon is technically correct. It is not something I know a lot about,but was curious to know which airfield was involved following my edits on the Hadleigh Line. RAF Raydon no longer exists so the word 'now' is not correct, but also it seemed to me in searching for the information that all the UK bases used by the USAF during the war still seemed to be called 'RAF xxxx'. I suspect that post-war any U.S. military establishment in the UK was subject to a contract and fee, whereas during the war the USAF were based at RAF stations on what might have been called an 'all hands to the pump' scenario. That might explain why the name would have been 'RAF Raydon' at the time. I'm not sure, but it worth mentioning.

I hope otherwise, that I have progressed from my early editing attempts. Best Wishes / Eastern Nat (talk) 11:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I wasn't too sure myself. The thing is, it's not usual to have text like

... handling supplies to a nearby United States Air Force base. [ see RAF Raydon. ]

If it's not the same base, we'd put it in a separate "see also" section. If it is the same base, and the reference explicitly confirms that, we'd put something like this:

... handling supplies to the nearby United States Air Force base at RAF Raydon.

Since I believe that it is the same base, but I can't check it in the book concerned, the mention of RAF Raydon needs to be after the ref; but I wanted the text to flow properly. We could of course put something like this:

... handling supplies to a nearby United States Air Force base, later known as RAF Raydon.

One person who may know for sure is Mjroots (talk · contribs) - you've already encountered him in connection with LNER ships. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello again RedRose : Looking again at the pages for RAF Raydon and Raydon there's no doubt it is the correct airfield, and it does appear to have been re-named 'RAF Raydon' when taken over by the RAF, having actually been built by the US Engineer Corps. My '[see RAF Raydon]' was neutral on the question of when it got that name, but I think I would be happy to go along with your last suggestion 'later known as'. You will see I changed USAF to USAAF which was their title until 1947 apparently. Finally, sorry for sending same message about 6 times, I was getting a server warning which invited me to re-try and you know who God loves..... Best Wishes / Eastern Nat (talk) 09:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)--Eastern Nat (talk) 09:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

You weren't the only person to do that... I'm not sure of the exact cause, but I suspect that the Wiki software is trying to switch on the orange "You have new messages" banner to alert me, but is somehow failing to do so. This causes an error message to be sent to you, but this gives the impression that your whole post failed, rather than a tiny bit. My advice is to check your contributions to see if the most recent edit is the one that you just attempted: if it's there, you'll know that you actually succeeded, and don't need to go for the "try again" link. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

I've replied again on my TP. Thanks. --Chip123456 (talk) 08:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:RefToolbar 2.0

Please see: Wikipedia talk:RefToolbar 2.0#Cite button. The Cite button for RefToolbar 2.0 appears in every namespace but the article namespace. Could you take a look at the code? Thanks much! --Funandtrvl (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, this is really not my area. I use RefToolbar 1.0, where the cite button always appears (although its position varies, see Wikipedia talk:RefToolbar 1.0#Cite button). Although my only edit in MediaWiki space was to a .js file, the change that I made was written by somebody else (see the relevant talk page). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia administrator hopefuls

Hi, re your edit to Template:User wikipedia/Administrator someday and your edit to Template:User wikipedia/Administrator maybe - the effect is that users with these userboxes are no longer placed in Category:Wikipedia administrator hopefuls, which is contrary to the advice on that cat page "The following userbox will add you to this category", and also at Wikipedia:List of administrator hopefuls: "To do so simply add either of these userboxes to your userspace". --Redrose64 (talk) 11:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Please see User_talk:Rick_Block#Wikipedia:List_of_administrator_hopefuls. - jc37 12:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox settlement

Hi Redrose64,

I saw you have made some changes in the template "Infobox settlement" and I suppose you can help me.

This template orders the location map in a row ("tr") and the coat of arms and the flag in another row ("tr"). For most of the countries that is OK, but you may know that Chile is a very long country and the infobox get very large, too large in my opinion. See for example Santiago (commune).

Hence, I have played with Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox and put the flag, the coat of arms and a little communal map in a column along with the large location map of Chile: you can take a look to Template:Infobox settlement/testcases.

My first question is: is it necessary? Do you know another way to get similar results?.

I think it is necessary and therefore I wanted to edit and publish a new template Template:Infobox settlement Chile, but it doesn't work as you can see in the red message in the first line. (the current version is only a copy of "Infobox settlement". the changes are to be merged from sandbox)

Second question: how can I bring my new template to work?.

--Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 14:45, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The best place to raise such matters is on the talk page for the template concerned - in this case Template talk:Infobox settlement. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I moved the question tothe talk page. Feel free to participate in the answer. --Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 15:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Fishguard and Goodwick

Hi Redrose64, Thanks for for sorting the rail symbol, out of interest what did I mess up by changing the infobox to UK from GB coz I cant see what it did, I'm asking this for future reference btw not to be picky as I appreciate all the help I can get on here, Cheers Jimmy3d0 (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

{{Infobox UK station}} is a redirect to {{Infobox GB station}}, technically they are equivalent, but there is no benefit to be gained by using one over the other, as you tried here. The problem was that with this edit you supplied a second |symbol= parameter: there already was one, albeit blank, just above |manager= (the parameter which you filled in with this edit). If a named parameter is given more than once, all except the last instance are ignored, even if the last one is blank.

When adding a parameter to an infobox, first see if the required parameter is already present and if so, amend that one. You only need to add the parameter if it is not already present. When doing this, note that infoboxes are normally laid out one parameter per line, to make it easy to spot if a parameter is present, so a new parameter goes on a separate line, not tacked on the end of an existing line.

When filling in the value of a parameter (whether new or an amendment), make sure that you use appropriate formats. For example, with this edit you used an inappropriate syntax for the |image_name= parameter - after you and others had a try, I fixed it here. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much Redrose64 that's all very informative! The reason I had done it that way is because I tend to copy formats from other pages when trying to replicate things like this so has copied the |symbol=rail from Fishguard Harbour railway station as that is how they have it on there? I here what your saying though about the last one bieng used if there are doubles, funnily enough I was just comparing the two when you fixed it and had been since the edit so I guess I would have found it in the end!!! and yes the same was the case when you fixed the other one you mention above!! us novices hey, must drive you mad lol ;-) thanks again Jimmy3d0 (talk) 21:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

COI

Schabas , possible COI

See User_talk:Schabas#Conflict_of_interest. As far as I know it has not been confimed that this editor (previously editing Michael Schabas) has any real conflict of interest. However a recent edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crossrail&curid=241693&diff=492790031&oldid=492754087 promotes an organisation Michael Schabas was involed in http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_schabas/profile.html (a director).

If you can look at this in your administrative role that would be appreciated - it's not serious, but probably needs looking at. If too busy please let me know and I'll leave an open request on the relavent help desk.Oranjblud (talk) 01:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I remember the name as one who has had COI issues before - and I recall commenting in a related AFD. But COI isn't really my specialism, so it's probably best on a suitable noticeboard. Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Clacton-on-Sea Branch

Hi Redrose, Can I clarify branch line situation, the branch that diverges from main line at Colchester [ which is often known locally as 'North' station] today has 3 termini at Colchester Town, Clacton and Walton, so I would suggest that my wording was OK. See plan on Sunshine Coast Line page. Best Wishes / --Eastern Nat (talk) 11:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

LMS Class five

Listen chum.

I have only inserted information that is taken directly from official records. By removing messages that warn people about the limitations of the information displayed you are deriving them of the possibility of understanding where they might draw incorrect conclusions.

I happen to have the most comprehensive data about the boiler history of this class of locomotives in existence - bar none. I don't say that lightly, and have supplied information to people who have written and are writing books on the subject. I thought it would be a good idea to pass on some details to the public domain which might interest people who are interested in the history of the class, or are making models which they would like to be historically correct. Unfortunately many existing publications contain substantial errors, and it is not always correct to rely on citing particular volumes because mistakes are often perpetuated ad nauseum.

Similarly with the Horwich Moguls, I have the most comprehensive collection of historical data on this class of locomotive, and have acted as a consultant to several people who have written on the subject including the late Arthur Cook and David Truman, both of whom I know well.

Unfortunately I don't have enough life left in me to set about publishing the data I have, and it seems appropriate to release some of it via Wikipedia - were it not for people like you who seem to think they know best (even though they obviously don't) and are determined to stifle any innovation, and deprive the public at large from ever knowing these things.

If you feel that a mistake has been made (and let's face it, we are all fallible) then it is up to you to prove it. You won't find a more informed source for the information I have chosen to place on the site. Okay, I got the length of time a particular locomotive was transferred to another region by about 25% in excess, but the response was somewhat excessive nit picking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.13.4.50 (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

No, you listen "chum". Taking information from official records fails our policies on original research and verifiability, because you are not using published sources. Making unsubstantiated statements in articles about the accuracy of published material fails the policy on neutrality.

I am not questioning the amount of data which you personally possess. But if you have supplied information to people who have written books on the subject, it is those books which should be used as references in the article. See WP:CITE for how to add references.

I don't "think that I know best". I try to make sure that material falls within our policies ad guidelines. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.

If I feel that a mistake has been made, it is not "up to [me] to prove it". The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Wonder where he got "the most comprehensive collection of historical data" aka boiler record cards? Ning-ning (talk) 22:08, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

List of Doctor Who DVD and Blu-ray releases

Just to let you know that some refs were added for the August 2012 release date. The IP was right about that. Caden ^cool 21:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw WOSlinker (talk · contribs) do that. The page has a long-term history of anons adding unsourced release dates. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay I understand but Amazon.com is pretty good about release dates. Also when you reported the IP to ANI you didnt let him or her know. It's good practice to let them know :) Caden ^cool 22:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Gosh, RedRose wrong about a Dr Who edit? Impossible. Maybe the BBC forgot to email RedRose the details of all the upcoming releases, which is unthinkable for them to leave out the world's only authority on Dr. Who. Unforgivable of them. Still, I'm sure RedRose will now be apologizing for their error. Actually, there'll be no chance of that as that would be an admission they got something wrong. Again. Odd that MarnetteD hasn't stepped in with a snarky comment or two. Must be on holiday. TVArchivistUK (talk) 15:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

If you would care to examine the circumstances, you will find that I added no information to the article - wrong or otherwise - but removed some unsourced information (which turned out to be correct). --Redrose64 (talk) 15:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

If you would care to examine the history of the circumstances, you created an edit war when a contributor was making a correct edit that you repeatedly reversed, insisting that you were correct. You were not. Just like the edit wars you've created in the past when you're assertion of facts has been proved wrong. If you would care to examine the history of these and many other circumstances, you will see that you owe many editors many apologies. It's such a shame when the power achieved by certain editors who've risen to the ranks of administrator through their love of train spotting and their ownership of Dr Who bully and abuse people trying to enhance pages by making correct edits. Try saying sorry for a change instead of always defending your behaviour with arrogance. Wikipedia might actually benefit from it. There's a thought. Still, you know best. As always. TVArchivistUK (talk) 16:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I didn't "insist that I was correct". I asked for sources, per WP:V. If you don't like what I do, you could always open that investigation that you mentioned - twice - in April this year. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

You repeatedly start edit wars to assert your version of facts and as far as I can see, you have never, ever apologized for your erroneous mishandling of your inept, malicious and vindictive campaigns against anyone who dares to assert they know more about Dr Who than you do. The war you created yesterday is another perfect example. Since you are determined at all costs to have the last, aggressively nasty word on this subject and will keep posting untl you get it, why not make it "I'm sorry I started an edit war over the release of DVDs where I was completely incorrect". Go on. Try it. Alternatively, issue yet another threat. That's more in keeping. By the way, you have been reported and not just by me. But as an administrator, I don't expect for one moment anyone to take the slightest notice. So, get dressed, put away your train spotters guide to the little guage railways of the Chilterns, switch off the Dr Who DVDS, delete the threats you made to the editor yesterday and apologize. Go on. Aww, go on. OK, failing that just post back here another defensive threat then. You MUST have the last word as per. I give it 5 minutes. Tick, tick, tick... TVArchivistUK (talk) 16:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Forget it. Administrators never, ever apologize for anything. They are above all wikipedia laws and are far too important. The editor making CORRECT edits was blocked and threatened. RedRose64 started the edit war and suffered no consequences. They certainly will never, ever apologize, nor will they suffer the same treatment they mete out to others. It's a sad rule of this site. Nobody polices the police indeed. JKMMOC (talk) 19:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

And you shouldn't sock to harass other users.Edinburgh Wanderer 22:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

You are a disgrace to the wikipedia community and should be barred indefinitely for your behaviour in this matter. You should be very ashamed for being one of the most malicious and spiteful administrators on this site. Go ahead and ban my IP address now. Give yourself another thrill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.187.201.11 (talk) 09:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Is this a joke? I can tell you from first hand experience, Redrose is the most helpful, understanding Wikipedian, and I'm telling you now, you won't come across many editors like this. Also, where is that Investigation, I can't wait to comment! --Chip123456 (talk) 21:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Redrose64. I don't know if you've been made aware but the perpetrators of the sock/meat attacks in this thread have been blocked. You are free to remove/archive/or leave this thread here it is completely up to your. For the record Chip is 100% correct You are one of the best editors and admins that we have. Your work is much appreciated. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 03:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Knew I forgot something. You could also collapse this thread with some witty saying about Troll be gone or some such . Have a great week and don't let these attacks get ya down. MarnetteD | Talk 03:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Advice 2012

Hi, re this user with this edit, I'm not 100% sure that they used rollback correctly here. I asked them on their talk page, but they removed it. If they would of replied, I would of left it, but they didn't so that's why I'm asking! Advice?--Chip123456 (talk) 06:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:ROLLBACK does state (para. 4)

Standard rollback may only be used in certain situations – editors who misuse standard rollback (for example, by using it to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected) may have their rollback rights removed.

For me, this particular rollback does fall foul of that rule. However, you have informed Gungadin; and she removed your message, which is permitted under WP:REMOVED - it shows that she has read the message (she used rollback to remove your message, but that was legitimate use, see Wikipedia:Rollback#When to use rollback, second bullet).

No further action should be needed at this stage; but if you see rollback being used inappropriately again, you could leave another message pointing out the sentence which I reproduced above, possibly also the section which is linked from the first phrase, and ask for an explanation. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I thought it wasn't right, which is very disappointing from a long-term editor. I did ask for an explanation for the first 'misuse' but as said, the message was reverted. I will keep an eye on their contributions. --Chip123456 (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Why are you going to monitor her contribs?Rain the 1 15:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I will not monitor 24/7 but have a look every now and then to fully ensure that rollback is used correctly.--Chip123456 (talk) 18:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Be careful: see WP:HOUND. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, I don't have 'targets' is it were on Wikipedia, I just want to ensure that tools which are granted on trust, are used carefully and are consistently used correctly! Talking of granting, you said that for me to be granted RB rights after 5 months, I know an editor who was given them after 6 days how long before they are an admin?!--Chip123456 (talk) 18:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

IMO she has a good track record. I can understand why the content that you added was removed (but not sure why it was reverted). You wrote that Dot was "most likely" return in either Nov or Dec - when the source did not mention it as a definite. Original research is quite a problem for ficitional character articles. With it being so far in advance, any rough return date could easily be subject to change.Rain the 1 19:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Does she have a good track record Y was it reverted correctly N did I write the information on dot cotton N, it was a good faith IP look at the history to see more clearly.--Chip123456 (talk) 19:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Ahh blame culture. I can assure you that I had already looked over the history. When you undo an edit - you either restore or remove content and this suggests you agree or disagree. In addition, you provided an edit summary in which you stated that you had read the source - which was not actually cited in the article itself. Therefore you carried out original research because you just restored content without citing a source. So thankyou for the the tip you left on my talk page - but I'm afraid that you are preaching to the converted. I am also well to do with reading plain text - so I do not need illustrations of ticks and crosses to aid my understanding of replies.Rain the 1 23:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Chip, you reverted User:Bleaney who had himself reverted speculative language. see here. You did not even seem to realise that there was a problem with the edit that Bleaney reverted in the first place, which I find more concerning. I suppose one might query whether they want someone using tools, such as yourself to revert others' edits, when they dont even seem to know when someone is adding speculation. Perhaps your use of rollback should be scrutinized? Not that I have any inclination to do so because I prefer to edit articles rather than policing long-term users. And thank you Rain for the support.GunGagdin^Moan 23:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Look, carefully over my contributions. I don't abuse my tools, unlike some, to revert perfectly good edits, but I use them to remove vandalism. Point out some places where it hasn't been used correctly. And , I'm sure that people wouldn't want users using a Vandalism tool to revert good faith edits and then think they are doing everything wrong. So again, think about how you use your tools, instead of trying to point the finger at other editors...oh, and before I forget, maybe you would like to tell everyone how long you have been using rollback for compare to me, you should be more experienced and use them correctly, oh and how long have you been using Wikipedia for, you should know the RBK and VAND policies by now ?--Chip123456 (talk) 07:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Chip, regardless of your motives, or of which tool you used, you restored the text ", most likely November or December as her break is six months". This phrase is both unsourced and speculative, and so per WP:BURDEN ("The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material ... It has always been good practice to try to find and cite supporting sources yourself") and WP:CRYSTAL ("It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about ... whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced"), you should really have added a reference at the same time. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:25, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Chip, if anyone cares to know how long I have edited wikipedia, they can read it on my userpage. I don't need to prove myself to you. However, I will say that I have been editing wikipedia long enough to spot when someone is trying to rise through the 'ranks' of wikipedia to get to the heady heights of administrator as quickly as possible... That kind of thing is of little importance to me. I just try to get on with building the articles I have interest in when I have the time to do so. I don't come here to be patronised, so kindly leave me out of your glory hunting missions.GunGagdin^Moan 13:14, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Rise through the ranks? This is Wikipedia, not the army. Thank you for you constructive feed back (RR64), I personally thought that anyone who knew their date of the months (something which would be learnt in primary school) would of been able to figure it out, obviously, it must be harder than I viewed it. Gungadin, you still haven't pointed pointed out any misuse. Furthermore, I am not 'glory hunting' I was coming here to ask about a user who appeared to abuse their rollback tools.--Chip123456 (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I find it so ironic that you would try to insult others' intelligence ..... Have you ever considered that actors' contracts dont get renewed? Breaks last longer than originally intended? Or indeed that, regardless of when an actor may film, their scenes may not get broadcast until months later? We works with facts on wikipedia published in reliable sources, not speculation. It's meant to be an encyclopedia don't forget. In your vast research of wiki policies, you appear to have overlooked those forbidding the act of editorializing. Tip: you will certainly need to know about that if you are ever to obtain your goal of admin. Perhaps if you spent more time writing articles as opposed to policing and patronising other members, you might learn more about editing.GunGagdin^Moan 15:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

This, is actually my first comment on how an editor uses their rollback tools, incorrectly. I'm still waiting for my rollback mistakes, I would like to see them as it makes me know if I've done anything wrong, so I can act on it. I apologise if I sound patronising, the comment was not directed at anyone, but common sense should be used here. Also remember why this thread started. As for the admin 'rank', I, in regard to your comment, have removed myself from the hopefuls list. --Chip123456 (talk) 15:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Byfleet and New Haw train station

Apologies for editing the above page to your dissatisfaction. I was just trying to make it a bit more informative as there is very little on it at the moment. Fairly new to Wikipedia and trying to get my head round all the rules and regulations. No offence intended. Surreyboy84 (talk) 20:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Stefan Szkafarowsky

I appreciate your help with this article. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 15:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Unsigned comment templates

Hi, thanks for your comments on Template talk:Undated; I thought you might be able to help with this. Thanks. --xensyria^T 19:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Signature colours

Hi, Redrose64. Have you seen this discussion? Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Naturally - I was an early contributor. Not sure whether some of the others have been directing their comments at me or at you though. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

British Rail Class 74

I've given Pdiddyjr a final warning. Next step is the banhammer. Mjroots (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Simplified clarification requested

The whole discussion regarding Templates over at Village Pump is WAYYYYY too wordy for me to grasp all of it. I do not understand what they're discussing about protecting template name spaces. My experience with templates is limited, so I'm going to list what I'm used to. Please tell me if the discussion over at Village Pump affects me:

• Infoboxes for individual pages, as they have been set up already.
• Navbox designing, or editing existing navboxs.

Thanks for shortening this up for me, if you can. Maile66 (talk) 23:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

According to Special:ListUsers, you're not an administrator, but with your number of edits and length of service you're certain to be autoconfirmed. Thus, as things stand, you can edit semi-protected templates such as {{David Bowie}}, but you cannot edit fully-protected templates such as {{infobox settlement}}. You can amend the documentation page for that template. Template:Infobox settlement/doc. If you want the actual template {{infobox settlement}} to be amended, you can still make your change in its sandbox - Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox - and request an update on the template's talk page. A current example of this is at Template talk:Lang-en#Remove dead code, where it is requested that the amendments in Template:Lang-en/sandbox be copied to the main template page Template:Lang-en.

Every page on Wikipedia belongs to one namespace or another. This page is in the User talk: namespace; Template talk:Lang-en is in the Template talk: namespace; the others that I mentioned are in the Template: namespace. Another namespace is MediaWiki: - most users are unaware of this, but everybody encounters it every time that they use Wikipedia. It contains messages like MediaWiki:tagline - you've probably noticed that almost every page has "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" near the top.

The MediaWiki: is set up such that regardless of the protection level of the individual pages, edits to any page can only be performed by administrators. The first proposal - Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#RfC concerning template space - would have done the same for Template: space, but with the creation of a new user right below Administrator, to allow edits in Template: space. Without that right, you would have lost the right to edit any page in Template: space, including the /doc and /sandbox pages. Consider your past edits to pages in Template: space - none of these would have been possible if the proposal was already in place. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. This actually helped me a great deal to understand the situation. I'm wondering if Village Pump is the right place this should have come up for discussion and vote, but...hmmm...Maile66 (talk) 12:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for catching and fixing this. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:01, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

One more to go - Uuq --Redrose64 (talk) 18:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

D'oh. Thanks again. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

CSD

Hi, how can I see my CSD tagging contributions in a log and see how many were successfully deleted? --Chip123456 (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Right, I have a log now which logs my tagging however, it only shows them from when I started off the log, how can I get my other tags in there from before the log was setup? --Chip123456 (talk) 20:29, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

When you tag a page for CSD, you have the opportunity to watch the page, as with any other edit. If you do this, the act of deletion will show up when you next view your watchlist after the deletion takes place - it looks something like this

• (Deletion log); 20:14 . . January (talk | contribs) deleted page DiscountTVParts.com ‎(A7: Article about an eligible subject, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

But if you didn't watch the page, and haven't kept a manual log, there's not much you can do directly, other than ask an admin for assistance. There is a page Special:DeletedContributions/Chip123456 which lists your deleted contributions - such as those CSD taggings - but that page is only viewable by administrators.

This log you mention, I take it that it's a manual log - when does it start? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

It was setup using Twinkle, today. The setup is in ones contributions. --Chip123456 (talk) 20:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

• 20:12, 31 May 2012 DiscountTVParts.com (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A7). Using Twinkle)
• 17:16, 31 May 2012 Trolland (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G3). (TW))
• 20:14, 30 May 2012 Hanumant kishor sharma (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A7). (TW))
• 15:22, 30 May 2012 Geothermal energy in Italy (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G7). (TW))
• 19:22, 29 May 2012 Liste over Martiaan aeldre (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 19:20, 29 May 2012 Julia Irene Vargias (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1, CSD G1, CSD G2, CSD A7). (TW))
• 15:43, 27 May 2012 Qweqwerw (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1, CSD G2, CSD G3). (TW))
• 16:53, 26 May 2012 Raziels Dautghers (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A7, CSD G1, CSD G2). (TW))
• 20:42, 22 May 2012 المواد الخزفية وآليات كسرها (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G1, CSD A7). (TW))
• 20:42, 21 May 2012 Talk:Alycia Jones (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
• 18:20, 21 May 2012 Nicky Black Market (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 10:03, 20 May 2012 Jamie attard (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A7). (TW))
• 21:05, 19 May 2012 National Kids Football League (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 20:30, 17 May 2012 RaidingKingz (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A7). (TW))
• 17:39, 17 May 2012 Disclosure schedule (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G1). (TW))
• 06:56, 17 May 2012 Talk:Labsang Sangay. (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
• 16:14, 15 May 2012 Harkuchh.com (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 19:03, 7 May 2012 VIVA - Kuwait Telecom Company (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 09:54, 7 May 2012 Crimson Craze (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 15:33, 6 May 2012 Unfolded Film (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G2). (TW))
• 15:02, 6 May 2012 Unfolded Film (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 12:05, 6 May 2012 Day first express (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))
• 19:37, 3 May 2012 Googles and hexillions (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))

Above is an extract from your deleted contributions. Basically it's everything where "Requesting speedy deletion" appears in the edit summary. Note that if the speedy was declined, the page won't have been deleted, so there won't be an entry in that list - but it should still be in your normal contributions list. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, it doesn't appear though in User:Chip123456/CSD log--Chip123456 (talk) 06:39, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

No, but I don't use Twinkle, and have never looked at how it works. Have you asked at WT:TW? --Redrose64 (talk) 10:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Farnborough North redlink

Sorry about that, I thought it might have been done on purpose but my twitchy need to cleanup got the better of me. Won't happen again. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

LNER

Good catch. Case of a triumph of enthusiasm over intelligence there: sorry, and thanks. Britmax (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Sudo

"and they won't really care about the name of the template which produces that." So I can make a redirect named {{Get your ass in gear}} or {{Why is there never a goddamn admin when I need one}} and no one will care? :D Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

And people wonder why I don't participate more in WP:XFD. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

CSD, COMMENT

Hey, hope your having/had a nice holiday! Thanks for my TP comment. I'd thought I'd ask if you could tell me my CSD tagging success rate, how many of the articles I have tagged have been deleted? Also the admin someday template is not working again! --Chip123456 (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I see that you removed the {{User wikipedia/Administrator someday}} and later on added a {{User wikipedia/Administrator maybe}}. These work slightly differently; if you switched it back to {{User wikipedia/Administrator someday}} it should pop you back into Category:Wikipedia administrator hopefuls.

As regards successful deletions: the list of redlinks in #CSD above lists those. It might look like 100% success, but I didn't go looking for those where the speedy was declined. These should still show in your normal contributions list. Scanning that lot might seem to be a daunting task, but in the box at the bottom of each page is a link Edit summary search, so if you consistently use the same format for your CSD noms, you should be able to find most of them that way. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, is there anything else I should try and get involved in? --Chip123456 (talk) 20:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest looking at some of the failed RFAs (see here), to see what was perceived as lacking. Check in particular those with high tallies: these are likely to have a good selection of constructive criticism, whereas those with low tallies will mainly be early closures, failing WP:NOTNOW. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, will do! I've also been looking at the NAS guide, which was interesting! Ive been AFD'ing today, how do they look (on my user page). --Chip123456 (talk) 15:17, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I was thinking more in terms of adding !votes (keep, delete, etc.) rather than WP:NACDs; I've not checked them all, but I think that Steve Obsitnik was premature: AFDs typically run for seven days, and WP:SNOW is invoked where there is an overwhelming dominance. In this case it had run for slightly over five days, and only three users had !voted Redirect. It would have been better to have added your own !vote, let it run its course, and let somebody else close it. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:14, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, noted! Shall I reopen it for more votes? The reason I closed it was because there seemed to be no one opposing what the contributors and the nominator had agreed was best, and I kind of agreed with the redirect as well.--Chip123456 (talk) 17:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Not sure whether to leave it alone or not: maybe see if anybody complains in more formal terms.

BTW: when you close something as "keep", it's not simply a case of adding {{subst:afd top}} and {{subst:afd bottom}} to the AFD subpage. See WP:AFD/AI: you need to remove the {{Article for deletion/dated}} from the article (you did this on four, but missed Keith Davies, which I've fixed), and also add a {{Old AfD multi}} to the article's talk page (you missed this on all five: I've fixed up Talk:UFC 21, Talk:Steve Obsitnik and Talk:Keith Davies; others fixed up Talk:Pigasus (politics) and Talk:Blasts in Nairobi). --Redrose64 (talk) 19:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

If anybody complains, I'll reopen then, but so far I haven't had any rants on my talk page! And thanks for the above info, I forgot about the talk and must if skipped Keith by accident! I've been looking through th RFA's, to say the least, they can get very heated! What was yours like?I have seen it but how did you find it? --Chip123456 (talk) 20:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Not as difficult as I feared. I found that the trick was not to respond to everything; and only respond once I was sure of what I should put, even if that took a day or two. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Out if interest, what's your view on recall? Also I've noticed, that if you put things like 'I would try' I gives people the impression that you haven't go any experience in certain places, which gives reasons to oppose at the !vote stage. --Chip123456 (talk) 12:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed up Talk:UFC 2 - the |page= must match the last part of the AFD subpage name; and the |date= is the date of nomination, not of closure. Again, this one hadn't run the full seven days, and three of the !votes were not for keeping. It's probably a good idea to confine your NACDs to those discussions which have been moved to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old, unless it's very definitely heading for a keep. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I saw you on the history of the talk page. There was 6 keep and 2 delete and it was scheduled to end tomorrow. I have been placing my !votes on some of the AFD's, hope they're ok!? What are the judges like on examining previous edit wars? I've seen a current admin who was even blocked by Jimbo, but have managed to become an admin. How do they judge previous conflicts? --Chip123456 (talk) 18:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah, they were blocked after they became an admin, but they had broken copyright violations before. I know everyone makes mistakes so I was just enquiring. How would they assess whether the user has changed?--Chip123456 (talk) 18:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)The tally was 6 Keep; 1 Merge; 2 Delete but per WP:DISCUSSAFD it's not a simple vote.

Different people have different RFA criteria (some have made their criteria public, such as Kudpung). For example, some require a 100% clean block log, others merely require it to have no entries more recent than six months ago. A block by Jimbo should not be treated any differently than a block by a newly-qualified admin: what is important is the reason for the block, and the judgement behind that reason.

If you have a history of edit warring, there should be little evidence of this occurring recently: what they're looking for is that when one of your edits is reverted, you're willing to discuss and consider all sides (even when you're certain that you're correct), per WP:BRD.

Some people have scripts or other tools which perform an analysis of editing behaviour. I don't know the details.

As regards WP:RECALL, I regard this as personal choice. I hope that any bad decisions by me will get discussed with me long before any recall situation might become necessary. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure that you wouldn't be called to recall! I, with some help from another user have been trying to improve Chippenham railway station, as a railway enthusiast yourself, have you got some ideas of improvements? --Chip123456 (talk) 19:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)