User talk:Rodw/Archive 10

Geobox River - attempted to answer query

Hi Rodw. I've tried to answer your query at Template_talk:Geobox/type/river#use_of_.22city.22_for_settlements.--papageno (talk) 05:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Dermatology

Any interest in dermatology? If so, we are always looking for more help at the Dermatology task force, particularly with the ongoing Bolognia push. I can e-mail you the login information if you like? There is still a lot of potential for many new articles and redirects. ---kilbad (talk) 01:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

festival...

Hope you had fun watching the singing budgie...Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Somerset Cricket Museum

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer_review/Little_Thetford/archive2

Wikipedia:Peer_review/Little_Thetford/archive2 is being reviewed by Ruhrfisch (talk · contribs). He (she) has made very useful comments. I am working through them slowly but surely. However, I am looking for a second opinion on his (her) comment: "Much of the Archeology sections seems like it could become part of History, perhaps.". I have stet that comment for now. I am prepared to address it, if someone else agrees (as it is a fair amount of work for me). Any chance you can take a quick look? --Senra (talk) 14:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done I see you have been and commented. Thank you for your input. Much appreciated --Senra (talk) 14:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Featured topic

Hi! I am pretty sure you are the major editor of the FT Grade I listed buildings in Somerset. I have recently had the FT on Grade I listed buildings in Runcorn promoted from GT to FT, and in so doing I asked "them" to place it in the Art, architecture and archaeology section, rather than the Geography and places section, because I thought the listing of buildings was more about architecture (and history) than about geography. At the same time I suggested that the Somerset topic might be better in the Art, architecture and archaeology section, but this was disregarded. What do you think? If you want it moving I expect you will have to make a request to that effect on the Wikipedia talk:Featured topic questions page. Cheers.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:58, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

... or just move it yourself. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 14:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - tis done.— Rod ^talk 14:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Great! Good to have company.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:58, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Isle Abbots

I would be interested in understanding why you feel the page for Church of St Mary the Virgin, Isle Abbotts is necessary in addition to Isle Abbots. Is this part of a broader strategy? I am not sure how much additional material is likely to be added to the page on the village i.e. is the history of the chicken farm in Steamalong Lane documented anywhwere, even were someone to consider it notable. Also i note the variant spelling of Abbotts as regards the church. While I am familiar with this variant, I wondered whether this has any significance - such as the consistent use of this spelling in ecclesiatical documents.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Harrypotter (talk • contribs) 12:12 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Little Thetford

Little Thetford has been dormant for a week or so now. I posted a note on the Wikiproject FA team notice board on 23 June 2010. I have not received any interest. I am still being kept busy though. See Little Thetford flesh-hook and Ælfwaru as main articles, plus I have had input in a few other areas. I was looking for advice on how I can move Little Thetford towards Wikipedia:FAC.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Senra (talk • contribs) 16:58 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Rodw. You have new messages at Muhandes's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Christchurch, Dorset

Christchurch, Dorset is up for peer review. I cannot do it, as I have been involved. Do you know anyone who would be willing to take a look at it? --Senra (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Frome hoard DYK

I don't know whether you noticed my reply on my talk page, but I've just noticed that the Frome Hoard DYK isn't due to go on the main page until 1am tomorrow morning, to be replaced at 7am. I think the timing's a bit of a shame seeing as those most interested in reading it will be in bed and in all likeliness miss it completely! – B.hotep •talk• 07:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

This sort of thing is frustrating. I made a comment here, but did not get very far. I suppose we have to live with it(?).--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I can see how chopping and changing could cause large headaches for the DYK crew at such a late stage in the proceedings, but I suppose we should be comforted by the fact that people in other timezones will have more chance of seeing it. In this case, the subject is in the UK news so I presume most people from the UK would do the same as I did: come here to see if there was an article on it. I think it's a classic case of cakes and not being able to have it and eat it... or something. :) – B.hotep •talk• 09:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you will get anywhere with changing the times (particularly at this late stage). You could try asking at Wikipedia talk:Did you know but I suspect the answer would be that this is a global encyclopaedia with a world wide readership & discriminating between countries/time zones would be inappropriate.— Rod ^talk 16:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Frome Hoard

I said you should get the credit as well and I forgot, sorry. I suppose what I should have done is added you to the authors list in the first place, but it was only my second nomination, so you live and learn. If you can think of anyone else who should get this as well, let me know. Cheers. :) – B.hotep •talk• 21:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Wells

Hi Rod, thanks for your work on Wells and getting it to GA. Sorry about my absence from wp, but I was getting far too addicted to it and spending too much time here to the detriment of my work. So I quit cold turkey, and I haven't logged in for ages until today.Derek Andrews (talk) 10:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

List of hoards in Britain

Please see User talk:Bubba hotep#List of Hoards. BabelStone (talk) 23:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Little Thetford image replacement proposal

Little Thetford—Proposal to replace existing 2006 image of roundhouse with 1906 image. Please join the debate --Senra (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

List of museums in Somerset

Congratulations on the gold star — very well deserved. I really ought to have a go at the museums in Cheshire, but am a bit involved with lists and articles about conserved churches at present (and very interesting they are).

To entirely change the subject, I noticed on your user page that you have an interest in Cicely Saunders. Now there's an article that needs some TLC (this is not an offer). But I would like to see the article improved and properly referenced, etc. My personal interest is that I met her twice, once on a visit to St Joseph's (before St Christopher's), and again when I invited her to talk to our Christian Fellowship at medical school. What an inspiring person! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Chew Valley

I've just created an short article for somewhere in your patch: Knowle Hill. It's in need of an image so I thought I'd mention it in case you wanted to add a photo. Cheers. SP-KP (talk) 15:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Rod.

Wasn't sure if this was an automated message at first! Thanks for the welcome.

Stu..

--Gisburn guy (talk) 12:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Stanton Drew

Rod,

Sorry for posting on the wrong page. I missed the separate entry for the stone circles. Regarding your other comments... the linked site doesn't just feature photographs, but also information and maps. Such sites are commonly linked from Wikipedia entries for historic monuments. Am I missing something?

--Gisburn guy (talk) 13:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Stu.

Jadeitite

Hi Rod, I'm surprised about the BM people saying they prefer jadeitite when their own webpage for the axe head calls it jadeite, however if that's what they say, fair enough. I think it would be better to actually link to the jadeite article though, as it is a lot more comprehensive and relevant to the Sweet track article than the jadeitite one - which is just a stub. It looks as if those two articles should be merged anyway. My son is going to do the drawings this weekend but will be away until Tuesday so it will be next week before I can upload them I'm afraid. I may have a go at the cross section myself in the meantime - I'm not much of an artist but I should be able to do a simple line diagram and we can always replace it with a better one later. I've also got hold of those two books now, so I'll be adding some more from them later. Richerman (talk) 21:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm going away myself on Saturday but only until Tuesday. We're going in the caravan and my son will be in a tent nearby so I can nag him about getting the drawings done. Actually he's got the bit between his teeth and is talking about making a scale model of the track and taking photos of that as well. I was hoping we could get the article through FAC before you went away but I don't know if that's going to happen now. If not, I'm sure it will be there soon. Richerman (talk) 22:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Dan W.Griffin

Hi Rod

I have received a notification about a contribution being suspected of being used for 'promotional purposes'. It is not. What do I do about that?

I am writing contribution about a Bath-based author of whom I have recently been made aware. I feel his work should be featured on Wikipedia. Please could you advise me whether there is a different or more appropriate way to be going about this.

Regards

Mark

--Oogachaka42 (talk) 09:34, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Old Church of St Nicholas, Uphill

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of EHealth

I have nominated EHealth, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EHealth. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank You

Rod, This a rather belated thank you for contacting me to invite me to join the Wiki Somerset Project. I have only recently noticed that you sent the invitation. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and still finding my way. I have been contributing images and bits and pieces recently to my favoured subjects and am slowly getting to know the protocols, although I have a long way to go... (I am finding the more I do, the more I find I have to contribute, and the more anomalies etc I want to correct - it could become a major addiction!) I will do what I can for the Somerset project if I have relevant images and information. Good wishes, Jane (I haven't got to grips with signing off! - ??) ~ ~ ~ ~ '- - ~ ~ ~ ~' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jane Cartney (talk • contribs) 11:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Think I've got it now --Jane Cartney (talk) 11:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Flora and fauna in settlement articles

Hi. As you were one of the first to assist in my first article creation, I thought I would beg one moment of your time to help me consider whether it is worth adding flora and fauna, perhaps in an historical context, to an already FA article (excuse the pleonasm); I notice UKTOWNS omits both headings from its guidelines. Little Thetford has one surviving disease free Elm tree; many species of fish were once prevalent; the village is almost plagued with fox and wild deer. I may soon have enough for at least one decent paragraph on each of the two topics. Are there any example wikipedia GA or FA class articles which can help me decide? I am also unsure of the rules governing adding to already FA articles --Senra (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry – did not realise you were on holiday – ignore this post --Senra (talk) 18:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Please let me know your thoughts

I refer to your edit of 11:01, 6 March 2009 re http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Exford,_Somerset&diff=275371809&oldid=275371104. At least I have the courtesy to refer to you about your edit rather than silently making an edit without bothering to refer to those who inserted the information originally.

Perhaps you would like to tell me why you decided to make the edit. Your arrogance in doing this is unbelievable. If you feel that your edits are removing commercial information from the relevant entry then please remove ALL commercial references. The information that you removed may have had impacts that render you liable to financial penalties since your edits were not commercially balanced (e.g. the Crown and Exmoor White Horse Inn remained in the article (both commercial) - note that the Crown Hotel is NOT owned by Peter Hendrie and the reference to him as a photographer is commercial)

I expect that on return from your holiday you will be in contact with me regarding this.

I believe I am supposed to sign this by 4 ~ - I don't know why as I'm quite happy to give you my normsl contact details... however that's what I'll do

Colin (talk) 22:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Digital Digging

Hi, I noticed from my watchlist you had removed loads of external links to Digitaldigging. Is there a particular problem with this site (has it been added to a blacklist or something) which would prevent it being used as a reference or is it just its inclusion as an external list which you are changing?— Rod ^talk 12:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your message - I hope this finds you well! I wrote the stub-article Marden Henge and had it on my watchlist, and noticed that Frogbit had added a link to that article, and placed it above the official English Heritage link. Looking at that users edit record, I noticed a similar pattern to the entirety of their edits: place a link to digitaldigging, and placed above any official/main website. I looked at digitaldigging which seems highly adwords powered, and as Frogbit broke the rules on WP:LINKSPAM, reverted his edit path. I placed a note on Frogbit talkpage, and thought I would watch further before deciding on next actions. If you think that any of the digitaldigging links do add value to the various articles, then happy to support their addition - but its just the clear WP:LINKSPAM I was reacting to. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 00:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Hallowe'en 2010

		Halloween 2010 is Coming Up!
		Thank you for contributing to last year's Halloween-themed Did You Know effort. The 2010 Hallowe'en DYK nomination page is up, and I hope you contribute this year! - Tim1965 (talk) 02:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Clevedon

The article Clevedon you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Clevedon for things which need to be addressed.

Sorry forgot to send this earlier today. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Glastonbury's GA review

I've been through the article now and put the review on hold. I havent checked the image licensing or sourcing yet, but I'll most likely do that later this evening. Malleus Fatuorum 20:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Wells Cathedral

I'll try to get to it over the weekend! Amandajm (talk) 15:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Response

Well, first off, I wouldn't call it a mass reversion. Only two intermediate revisions were reverted in a single action, once. Hardly a mass reversion. Secondly, It looks like an accidental vandalism/spam action. When recent change patrolling things are really fast paced, and seeing the same URL pasted many, many times in an article triggers instincts. But I see you have corrected the action, so thanks for that. Alpha 4615 (talk) 20:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Rodw. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 September 3.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bath architecture

Hello Rod,

Thanks for the welcome! I'd like to have a go at expanding some of the other stubs in Somerset building and structure stubs category. In the meantime I'm working on User:Spoonfrog/Nile_Street,_Bath - let me know what you think if you have a moment to look at it. Its quite a minor street but all the buildings on it are listed, so I think it is notable enough.. It also fits well with Norfolk Crescent and Nelson Place West, completing the trio.

Thanks --Spoonfrog (talk) 21:40, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

HI

I wouldnt call it vandalism, on the phnom penh thing it who ever keeps putting it up made that montage very Ugly and sloppy, the one I created had citations, and was more clearer to see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.172.43 (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Wells Cathedral / Photography

Just wondering: The other day I have visited Wells Cathedral - a very impressing building - and have purchased a photography permit there. This permit is for private use only, further permission is required for extended use. Same practice in other English Cathedrals - Canterbury, Exeter... Wikipedia uses images from the interior of these buildings that are hosted in the commons and show very general licenses as usual. License is granted by the author, no comment on permission by the cathedral trust, the clergy or whoever may be responsible. The commons usually are quite touchy as far as copyright issues are involved. Do I see a problem where there is none? Any answer would be welcome. Thank you. -- Johanning (talk) 18:14, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Away

Glad to see you are taking an interest in Wiltshire. It's more neglected than Somerset. Moonraker2 (talk) 20:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Greetings. I was just on the talk page for the new project and left a note there. It should do some good, especially if it develops a collection of resources, but in my view nearly all of the good work here is done by individuals beavering away on their own. Moonraker2 (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Primary Health Care (journal)

The article Primary Health Care (journal) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I am baffled that this stub survived for so many years. The article text is about a different journal than the title indicates and the only link in the article is a dead link. Unclear what this is about, no indication of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crusio (talk) 07:37, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree it is a stub but why does it need to go? This is a Twinkle led deletion with no real grounding. The article, when removed, would leave one red-link here. Surely having an article that explains what is in the list is doing no harm to anyone? I do not understand this drive for deleting things. I really don't --Senra (Talk) 19:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Churches Conservation Trust

I've had a go at replacing some of the churches in this list with List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in Northern England (starting near home, of course). Any comments, advice, improvements, etc?--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crewkerne

The article Crewkerne you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Crewkerne for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Paddlesworth

Re your notice to WP:KENT, I am prepared to semi-protect the article if it should prove necessary. Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be too much vandalism. I've left the editor who added the EL a note re EW and told them not to add the EL again without consensus, and to raise the issue on the talk page. Mjroots (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Chavonnes Battery

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Somerset Hospital (Cape Town)

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Minehead

The article Minehead you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Minehead for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Earthwork?

Hello Rodw,

I noticed you cited Burrowmump as an earthwork using a page that also describes it as a natural hill. I know it has earthworks on it, as i grew up in its shadow. I think the whole article may need substantial reworking if you want to say its a natural hill with some earthworks, which any reasonable person can agree to.

Dorian —Preceding unsigned comment added by DorianLeakey (talk • contribs) 21:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination for St Mary's Church, Wilton

Hello, your nomination of St Mary's Church, Wilton at DYK was reviewed and comments provided. --NortyNort (Holla) 11:17, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

English Heritage

Hi. In the discussion at wt:NRHP about address restricted sites, i complain aside about difficulty for me of getting anything out of English Heritage, but maybe i am just unfamiliar with the systems. Perhaps you could help, regarding a building discussed at Talk:List of Masonic buildings#HQ of the Order of Women Freemasons. I can't verify that the place is a listed building, beyond the place's own website assertion. I'll see there if you happen to have any better success. Thanks again for participating. :) --doncram (talk) 23:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

St John the Baptist Church, Inglesham

Thanks for asking me about this conserved church which, as you say, is particularly interesting. I thought it would be better to reply here than on my talk page. I have made a couple of minor tweaks to the article, and see no reason why it should not be OK for DYK as it stands. If you want some (IMO) comments for its development, here they are, for what they're worth. (I don't have any offline material to help you.) I would suggest a separate section on History, rather than have the historical bits spread throughout the article. Then the sections on the restoration and the interior fall within the Architecture section, rather than being separate sections. I would also put the churchyard cross is a separate section entitled maybe External features. "They" do not really like galleries, and it might be best to make a Commonscat link for the images — other than the Saxon carving which is important enough to retain within the article. As a matter of interest, I tend to use the Church infobox, rather than the Historic Site one; it allows for more relevant information relating to churches, even though they be redundant. I cannot see that the reference you have provided says that the church resulted in the formation of the SPAB (it may have done so but I can't find it). Also I'm not sure that Barton would be regarded as a reliable source. If you can find the information he provides elsewhere I would use that (although I think it might be an idea to use it as an External link, as the photos are so good). Not sure if this is of any use. Good luck in expanding it.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I've prepared a Church infobox in my sandbox here. Not sure if you'll prefer it. I have left a lot of empty fields, so you can see the amount of information that can be given. You may be able to fill some of these; the others you can delete (or leave blank). If you like it you can copy it across and replace the Historic Site one. As you say, a very interesting church (most of the conserved ones are of course).

Also I'm now using the Heritage Gateway website rather than Images of England. Images has not been updated, and will not be, and some of its info (including listing status) is out of date. Heritage Gateway gives you access to Listed Buildings Online (which is really Images updated, but with no photos), and lots of other archaeological and heritage sites. There has been some resistance to using Listed Buildings Online itself because of its advertising content, but Heritage Gateway does not have this potential objection.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I think your idea for a hook seems fine. There is no need to register at HG; just go straight in. I have been caught out by Images a number of times when a listing has been re-graded — can be embarrassing!--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for St Mary's Church, Wilton

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

St Petrock's Church, Parracombe

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of St Petrock's Church, Parracombe, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.everythingexmoor.org.uk/exmoor-encyclopedia/contents-list/49-p/761-parracombe.html.

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

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Parracombe copyvio

Hi Rodw, and thanks for the notification re. the copyvio. As it was over 4 years ago, I don't ever recall seeing the exmoor encyclopedia website before, and the quoted text did come directly from the 1954 book mentioned in the article, rather than any online resource, so either they have quoted from "my" article, or from the same original source! In the circumstances, slapping a copyvio flag on the articleand requiriung a temporary article to be created seems a little heavy-handed, but what's done is done now. I will see if I can re-word the article to ensure there is no longer any doubt - Regards, Lynbarn (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the Everything Exmoor website, (which has only recently been launched) the following comment is made: This section of the website contains information sent in by the people and businesses of Greater Exmoor. If you know something about the Greater Exmoor area that would interest other people then send in your text and pictures and I will add them to this ever expanding section of the website. I would therefore surmise that there is no copyright control over the material posted therein, and as such, any content marked as a copvio from this site can be allowed. Having said that, I note a comment I made in August 2006 in the Parracombe talk page, where I acknowledged that I may have used too much of the source article. I have now adjusted the text accordingly in the temporary page, and as your article carries sufficient detail of the church, I have removed most of the church reference from the Parracombe article, leaving the link in place. I trust this will satisfy the requirements as to copy violation, and allow the article to be reinstated. Regards Lynbarn (talk) 20:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for St John the Baptist Church, Inglesham

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Roddon redux

Finetooth has suggested I employ a copy-editor to have a look at roddon before throwing it at another review if you would be so kind my friend. I had asked Malleus first then read the posts above mine on his page and see he may be in a black mood so I came here :) If any of your followers fancy reviewing the article, please just go ahead and do so --Senra (Talk) 22:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Old St Cuthbert's Church, Oborne

You tagged this with WP Devon? Was this a mistake? Jolly Ω Janner 15:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Church of St Michael, Princetown

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia

Hi. :) I appreciate your diligence with respect to the copyright issues uncovered at St Petrock's Church, Parracombe! Your notes were very helpful. I did want to point out one thing: when you copy content from one article to another, you have to give credit. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. This is necessary because our content is not public domain, but liberally licensed for reuse. If you've removed all the copied material from this article, it doesn't matter here anymore, but please be sure that when you copy content in the future--even if just a paragraph--that you attribute, and if you know that you've copied content in the past, please go back and add attribution for it. If you have any questions about the procedures or policies, please feel free to drop a line at my talk page. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The rewrite seemed fine. :) A note in the edit summary (with a direct wikilink) should be sufficient if it's not extensive copying. If it is, I also use the recommended {{copied}} at the article's talk page and at the talk page of the source article. That helps especially if the source article is ever deleted for something. For instance, if the copyright problem had not been found when it was but disclosed later, we might never have realized that content had been copied from that article to another. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

A complex question deserves a complex answer. :D Did you copy or closely follow creative content from any article? If so, unless you were the sole creator of that content in the other article (in which case you own the copyright), then, yes, I'm afraid you do. For any article into which you've copied only content you authored or uncreative content (like refs) or into which you've written summaries completely in your own language, then no. And if that's not complete enough, please feel free to keep asking. You can give me examples if you'd like. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

{{Copied multi}} covers multiple sources. You don't need to attribute yourself, so you don't need to give credit to work done in your sandbox if you were the only working on it. Just credit the original source. If others have modified your content or you have modified theirs, you do need to attribute it. I'm not entirely sure I follow the question here: "I thought wp's license allowed reuse, with attribution & by linking to the article concerned could be read as implying that source." If you're asking if you can copy content from an article and imply that you've used it by linking to it in the article, no, I'm afraid not. We have to maintain a list of contributors, and the "edit summary" puts it in history. Again, though, the copied template is really only necessary if the copying is extensive, as a safeguard. It's recommended as good practice, but if the bits from others are small, you might omit that step for a source. Since Old Church of St Nicholas, Uphill was primarily by you with minor revisions, you might just link that one in edit summary. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for dropping the template on your page. I've nullified it. As to the list, close. :) A few formatting fixes make clear what was copied where. I've taken care of it. Thanks for your diligence with this! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:39, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

BHS maps

Hi Rod

Thanks for the welcome, it was good for someone to get in touch so quickly.

The reason that we have added British Horse Society emagin to Wikipaedia is because it provides a free service for the general public to view a route map (on OS 1:25k mapping )for the selected area. The routes can also be printed free of charge(the only site that currenlty allows this). The BHS is a charitable organisation and we fight for fair use and access to rights of way in the UK for equestrians. By definition this generally means that other user groups are supported too, such as cyclist and walkers.

As we are very new to Wikipaedia, is there any advise that you can give?

Best wishes Ceri BHSAccess (talk) 16:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Churches Conservation Trust in South West England

Thank you for asking me to look at this list before it goes live. This is really excellent work. The only "error" I have found is that the dates do not sort properly; for example, 16th century is followed by 1226, etc. No doubt you can fix that.

The rest of my comments are comments! I see that in the first column you some use "Church of X", and in other cases you use "St X's Church". For consistency I have omitted the word "church" and just use "St X" (they are, after all, all churches). This also allows for better sorting. I note that for your references you sometimes use Images of England, and sometimes Listed Buildings Online. I have been persuaded by (I think) Hassocks5489 to switch all references to Heritage Gateway. The problem with Images of England is that it is stuck in the year 2000 and has not been, and will not be, updated. I have found that in some cases buildings have been regraded or even delisted since then. Listed Buildings Online is up to date (I think), but it contains advertising material that seems to be unacceptable to some reviewers. Heritage Gateway links to Listed Buildings Online without adverts (and also to some other useful sites). So I am now using Heritage Gateway as my consistent reference site for listed buildings.

Another snag which has come to light (and this also applies to the list I prepared) is that the note at the top of the Date column states that this is the "date of first construction", and yet you (and I) in some instances use a range of dates. I guess we shall both have to use just the earliest date to make sense of the note.

I just wonder (and this is just a wonder) if it would be a good idea to make a Bibliography subsection for books in the Reference section. I cannot find that you have made any duplicate references, but if you or someone else wants to add say another Pevsner reference, it would complicate matters. Personally I would put all the books in a Bibliography section and make Harvard-type links. This allows for future flexibility, and also reduces the clutter in the Reference section. (Only a thought.)

You are very noble and have given much more detail than I have in the Notes section. I am lazy and just give just a bit, expecting readers to click on the link in the first column if they really want to learn more! However, maybe in this context, you could make more use of the non-breaking space function to prevent the separation of "Xth" from "century", etc. so that we do not get "orphans" or whatever they are called.

I hope this is of some use. If you or I want to take any of these lists to FLC maybe the lead might be expanded. But IMO they are already as good (better?) than some of those now featured (!). You might be interested to have a peep at this to see where I am with the "Heart of England". The notes column will be filled when all the articles have been written. Oh, a last thought: how about including one or two of the "best" images in the lead to give a bit more impact to attract the attention of casual browsers? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Congratulations on the nearly-50,000 edits!

Re the use of pixels. I don't have a clue how to format wikitables, so I just copied what I found someone else doing and tweaked it so it sort of worked. I guess percentages should work better, so if you modify your format accordingly, I could copy you instead!

Re IoE, I take your point. But for current and future work it might be better to use HG (or LBO) rather than run the risk of giving out-of-date references.

Re Harvard referencing, it's not complex, it's so easy even I can use it. In the Bibliography section use the "Citation" template, make sure you put the date of publication in the "Year" field. Then use the {{Harvnb|Name|Year|p=.}} template. The joy of this is that if the reader clicks on the reference, it takes him/her down to the appropriate book in the Bibliography section. (For multiple authors you modify the template to {{Harvnb|Name1|Name2|Year|p=.}} etc.)

When your list goes live, the Churches Conservation Trust article will have to be amended; maybe like I have done for the Northern England section, deleting the counties covered in the list, and this will get rid of a lot of clutter in the article.

Hope this helps a bit. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The List of churches is an excellent piece of work. I think adding WP Anglicanism is optional, it would apply in principle to any church building used by Anglicans since the Reformation. Best wishes.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've added WP Anglicanism to all the CCT churches.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Sorry, I did not see that earlier. I was thinking of old ecclesiastical parishes and the plain 'Roseland' seemed unusual. I do not think 'Gerrans' should be in the article name.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 14:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Only a tiny point; I wonder if it would make the Names column clearer by adding a comma after the name of the church, so separating it from the name of the settlement. It is sometimes difficult to spot where the break should be. Cheers.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:22, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

You've really done some work on this! Another minor point. As you have a Grade B, this should be explained in the key; maybe just make the relevant box "II* or B".--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Good idea. I am sure (I think) that I saw somewhere that A, B, C, equated (as near as could) to I, II*, II, but of course I can't find it now. And there have of course been instances where II* has gone to I (and vice versa - which is why we must be careful to use the most up to date evidence).--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) I've received a reply from CCT about consecration. They say "(1) The church at St Thomas Becket is a private residence and was never in our care, it is only the tower that we look after. The church would have been deconsecrated before it was sold. (2) St Paul, Bristol is used as a circus school but it remains consecrated. (3) Guyhirn Chapel in Wisbech, Cambridgeshire is the only one of the buildings in our care that isn't consecrated but that is because it never was." Hope that helps (a bit). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:08, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for fixing that! My mistake. Scientific29 (talk) 19:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for St Mary the Virgin, Tarrant Crawford

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Worlebury Camp

I noticed you re-rated Worlebury Camp from Start-class to C-class. I want to eventually get the article to "good article" status. Do you have any suggestions for improvement to the article? Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in South West England

Hello! Your submission of List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in South West England at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Allen3 ^talk 14:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome (back) to the wonderful world of portals...

Thanks for stopping by at the review for P:ENGLAW and your helpful comments. I'm sure that Portal:Somerset has great potential. I've fixed the problem with {{selected picture}} (not a template I'd seen before - when I started building a portal, I just copied the format/syntax of another working portal, which didn't use it) - by adding "archive=no" to each picture. I will try and get to your FLC soon - probably tomorrow, particularly if I can't get into work because of the tube strike! Bencherlite^Talk 22:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

template:Selected biography now supports the "archive=no" parameter. Stop making me learn template syntax!! Bencherlite^Talk 23:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's suppressed as long as "archive=" is not blank; I got an edit-conflict with you on the John Cleese subpage just as I was setting "archive = And now for something completely different"... Bencherlite^Talk 23:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. Bencherlite^Talk 18:11, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

References

I think the answer is that the portal is a window to the article itself, where the references will be found (working on the assumption that higher-quality articles with decent references are selected for the portal). So, for example, the summary of the Featured Article on the main page itself never includes references, even for BLPs or when the lead paragraphs of the article from which it is taken include references e.g. for quotations or particular claims. The same with DYK, in fact. But I don't think I've seen the point discussed as a point of principle anyway. Portal:U.S. Roads, for example, has a references section for the news items which aren't linked to particular articles, so need to be backed up in another way; that section appear on the front portal page. P:ENGLAW, as you may have seen, has a smaller news section and the stories which aren't from Wikinews are referenced on the sub-page Portal:Law of England and Wales/News, which is another way of doing it I think. Interesting point, though, and perhaps worth further discussion elsewhere. From a technical point of view, I'm sure it's perfectly possible to have references appear on the main portal page e.g. in a separate box at the bottom, which would pick up the references from the "selected foo" sections each time the page changes. Bencherlite^Talk 13:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll let Cirt (talk · contribs), one of the FPo Directors, know about this - he may have more to say, or experience upon which to draw. Bencherlite^Talk 13:43, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. Raul doesn't give attribution in the edit summaries for TFA blurbs, so I'll ask MRG herself. What a hassle it would be to do this; if attribution is required for TFA blurbs and portal summaries, and I can see the argument, then there's 1,000+ portals and 5 years of TFA blurbs to be speedily deleted for licence infringements, I suspect! Bencherlite^Talk 14:41, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in South West England

Orlady (talk) 06:02, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

preserved churches

Just wanted to let you know I've left a comment concerning my observations on the sources, I hope it helps. Afro (Talk) 07:25, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Naish Priory

Thanks for the advice on the Naish Priory article. I will put the citations in over the next few weeks. Meant to do that some time ago but I have been very busy with other work I'm afraid. Rgds Fishfly88 (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Sammy Woods

I've already started work on the article, have a look at User:Harrias/sandbox4. It's been off my radar for a while recently, but I'll put my efforts back into it in the next few days, and see what I can do. Regards, Harrias ^talk 18:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Wedmore

Re Dominic Dromgoole: this is a tricky one. The Wikepedia page for him has "Born in Bristol, Dominic grew up on a farm in Somerset and attended Millfield School in Street, Somerset". Although there are many people who could privately vouch for those facts, the article gives no source data at all. I have trawled all the Links and References to no avail. The 'farm in Somerset' is in fact a not particulary large country property in Theale with a bit of land attached, and in fact his father was 'the eminent director' (and HTV Executive) and by any stretch of the imagination not even a gentleman farmer.

It is perhaps strange that there is no Wikepedia page yet for Patrick, who incidentally gets a specific mention in one Gilly Cooper's bonkbusters to make it quite clear to the reader that he is not the infamous television executive about whom the plot revolves.Flying Stag (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, for some reason I took it that Dominic and his father Patrick were well known, but on reflection that is probably not true except in theatrical (and bonkbusting) circles (neither of which do I belong to!). I have poked around the internet a bit more - both Dromgooles are on Facebook. The link with Somerset is well cited but is not in itself relevant to Wedmore. Patrick shows as a dead link in Dominic's article, probably because there is not enough in the public domain to start an article.Flying Stag (talk) 21:35, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Anthony Paulet

I'm removing your tag. The copyright violation if any, goes in the opposite direction. Leo copied from MY site. If you had looked at his sources listed on his page, you'd see that. I added my own material to this article. At any rate copyright violation is not where you have cited your sources. It where you have not.Wjhonson (talk) 18:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Wraxall Swimming Pool

Hello Rod,

just wondering why the comment about Wraxall swimming pool was deleted. I am currently finding out online 'proof' that it is there. I know it is, I grew up there and have been in it. It is made from local stone and has a hand rail at water level.

Kind regards

174.1.42.202 (talk) 22:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC) Anders Frappell

Somerset cricketers

Hey, your addition of Jos Buttler to WP Somerset reminded me of something I meant to ask a while back: feel free to move this conversation to WP:Somerset if you like. Should all Somerset cricketers be added to WP Somerset, regardless of their importance to the club/county, or should it be limited to certain ones; in which case what would the criteria for that be, just captains, just ones who are 'iconic'? Regards, Harrias ^talk 18:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

That system makes sense; people that 'Somerset' would associate with. Along that vein, Andrew Caddick should probably be part of the project? Although he was born in New Zealand, I'd say he was pretty prominent for Somerset, and then England. How about players born in Somerset but who only played a handful of games for Somerset? They are Somerset through and through (I've got a few in my head that I know still play club cricket in the area), but they have never really been good enough to become well known across the county. Instinctively, I'd say they wouldn't make WP:Somerset, but then on the other hand - if I was such a player, I'd feel I should be I think. I'm not overly bothered, as the articles are tagged by WP:BIO and WP:CRIC anyway, so they won't get ignored, which is the main worry and reason for WPs in my opinion: to make sure things don't fall through the cracks. Harrias ^talk 20:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Personally I'd agree with you, as I view it, WP:Somerset should be about Somerset, and things connected to it. Marcus Trescothick, yes; Justin Langer and William Hancock, not really. For the time being I'll only add articles for those who I think are pretty prominent for the county. In doubt, I'll come have a chat! Harrias ^talk 22:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

King's Sedgemoor Drain

Hi Rod. I have just expanded the King's Sedgemoor Drain article by about 50%, and wondered if you had a spare moment to cast your eye over it, to see if you think it could be a B-class article now. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Following your prompt I've had another look at King's Sedgemoor Drain. Its definitely a B & I've changed it on the talk page, however when checking & formatting web references I found several deadlinks, which need to be fix or replaced etc.— Rod ^talk 20:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Rod. This raises an interesting point, as so much of the web is a bit transitory. I have converted the Institure of Civil Engineers Newsletter ref to a cite book, rather than a cite web, because I have read the article, but it is no longer on the web, and I cannot find anything equivalent. I found an alternative for the May Gurney newsletter, but it is just a sentence, rather than an article about the upgrade. I have deleted the canoeing sentence, as BCU-South West seems to have disappeared, and I can find nothing else. My point is, once an item is no longer current, its web source may be removed, and then there is no record of the event ever having taken place. I have a similar problem with a bypass built over the top of the Neath and Tennent canal. There are no known sources that give a date for the work, because it happened a while ago. I don't know what the solution is, as I cannot keep a copy of every web page cited. Sorry to rabbit on. Bob1960evens (talk) 10:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Taunton

Rod - Thanks for being the voice of reason - my first reaction was to think that Dead-or-Red was having a hissy-fit / flounce but fully accept that blanking the page could have been a mistake. I would appreciate your calming influence on the talk page w.r.t. the list of notable people. I don't want to get drawn into an edit war as I'm a better Wikipedia editor than that. --Simple Bob (talk) 21:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance yesterday. I've had Taunton locked down for 4 days to stop the silliness, so now we have the opportunity to discuss on the talk page. I would really appreciate your opinion on the criteria we should apply for listing in notable residents (whatever that might be). --Simple Bob (talk) 19:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

But it is true about Pittweem I swear it is so! Oh your no fun, well there are a few pages still edited that you haven't spotted mwahaha, I will be impressed if you can find them, although it was in on another computer, so no IP to trace ;). Your clue is schools from the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.177.155 (talk) 01:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Somerset photos

You've done a very nice job re. the Somerset portal. It's first class. Please go ahead and use any of my photos you like on Wikipedia. Sorry, but I don't have any other photos of Somerset that aren't already uploaded. The ones already on Wikipedia were taken during a visit to the county back in 2007. There are a few more photos of Somerset locations that you may not yet have seen in the following articles i.e. Norton St Philip, Frome and Whatley. Keep up the good work! You're a credit to Wikipedia. - Nabokov (talk) 12:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason why you upload your pictures to Wikipedia instead of Wikimedia Commons? Using the latter would be much better as it allows the photographs to be used on other Wikipedia language sites. --Simple Bob (talk) 12:43, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

In fact I see a lot of your photos have already been migrated to Commons and are awaiting deletion on Wikipedia. It would save a lot of time and effort if you put them there in the first place. Nice pics b.t.w. --Simple Bob (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

<<errant post deleted by original poster>>

<<errant post deleted by original poster>>

Talkback

Hello, Rodw. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions.
Message added 10:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New list

Hi, Rod. Just to let you know I have added List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the English Midlands to the mainspace, having borrowed mercilessly from your list. The latter seems to be languishing a bit at FLC, and I have tried to encourage some interest over the weekend. With a few final tweaks I cannot see it failing.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia 10

Hi Rod - just added a rough guide to the running order for the day to Jan 13th Wikipedia 10 page you set up...as I read it...we can roll 'our local Wikimedians' into the day in the following way...if we get as many as we can into Watershed 1 for 9.30am that morning..we can have 'coffee with Jimmy' (on the Bristol Project Page I count 8 names including you: RodW; JezHotwells; Ghmyrtle; Mattbuck; SimpleBob; Rwendland; William Avery & Qwfp)...if the groups 'stay' during the press interviews & other groups coming in to see Jimmy between 9.30 & 11.15am - they could be helpful seeing people in & out plus listening to some of the ideas under discussion. Then at 11.15am we all walk up the hill with jimmy to the event. I don't know how much a room costs for a Bristol WikiMeet after the event but you could put in an application here: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Microgrants

I've already told the Board I think £50 to get the group off the ground would be a fair award. So they'd be expecting the application - feel free to cc'me and cite me You could have the meeting at the Victoria Rooms or back at the Watershed - I know the people behind both venues so I can fix this up easily.

We don't have to stop at 8 people - as I said before I am looking to get as big a group going as possible and am holding 50 remaining tickets aimed at Wikimedians. Obviously Wikimedia UK members are first come choices. But it does not cost much to join £5. No there is no restriction geographically. Come from John O'Groats and no ticket but Wikimedia UK member 'you are in' Steve virgin (talk) 15:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Woods

Thanks for your comments: I'm away from home at the moment with work, which is limiting the amount of time that I have to spend on the article. I'd really like to get enough text in the article for it to be eligible for DYK before I transfer it over, which isn't THAT much more, especially given how much more there is in total. I'm confident I could have this done by 12 December: if you really want it before that, I'll see what I can do, or just move it over now, and to hell with the DYK. Harrias ^talk 17:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, when I left this message I was reading the above one regarding just that. Unfortunately with it being a week day, I don't think I'll be able to make it: getting married next year, so can't afford too much time off work the rest of the year, or the honeymoon would be a bit short! Harrias ^talk 18:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Quantock Motor Services

I see you've put in a reference for the QMS Dennis Dart ("The Trident" (PDF). GB Bus Group. Retrieved 30 November 2010.). I've looked through this and can't find mention of this bus, just some stuff about selling a vehicle and recieving two new Lynxes. Where abouts did you find it? Geof Sheppard (talk) 14:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Talk:Leisure Dome (Weston-super-Mare) for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Talk:Leisure Dome (Weston-super-Mare), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Leisure Dome (Weston-super-Mare) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Simple Bob (talk) 15:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)