User talk:Nev1/Archives/September–October 2013
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Grade I listed buildings in Coventry
Hi, there is a problem with Grade I listed buildings in Coventry when converted to use the templates. The items with notes against them cause problems with the image display, may be it was the change to add the upload a new image option. See the St Mary's Hall image where the note in the left-hand column is reproduced under the image with part of the co-ords. Keith D (talk) 19:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- There was a similar problem with <ref></ref> tags on some lists in the name column. The upload function doesn't like it. I've gone ahead and moved the notes to the 'notes' column and it works fine now. I checked Grade II* listed buildings in Coventry and that was clear. Having notes or references in the name column is uncommon, but if you spot any let me know. Nev1 (talk) 19:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Category A listed buildings in the bleak and dismal N E of Scotland
Hi, I've uploaded a few more images for the category A Listed Buildings; hopefully I've done it correctly this time. Commons and Categories are not really my forte, so you may have to double check I haven't managed to break anything - I don't think I've quite managed to break Wikipedia yet! May try to get some more tomorrow, weather permitting! Just give me a poke if there is an easier/more sensible way I should be uploading and including these, please? Thank you! SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:55, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- That's all absolutely spot on. I've got my fingers cross for sunny weather throughout September! Starting from the lists and clicking on the icons is the easiest way from a computer. If you've got an andriod phone, there's and app you can download which will help you locate buildings, and if you want to upload photos on the spot do so (though if you're using a separate camera rather than a camera phone you're better off waiting until you get home). Nev1 (talk) 19:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you! SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC) Android? No, I'm an Apple devotee.....
- Thank you! SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC) Android? No, I'm an Apple devotee.....
Cross-border listings
I've noticed some instances where the list entries have gone awry as a result of a bridge crossing a border. These generally have dual listings. The Royal Albert Bridge is in Devon and Cornwall. However both listings are in Grade I listed buildings in Plymouth. The Royal Albert Bridge really should be Grade I listed buildings in Cornwall, especially this exact situation is singled out as a footnote in Listed buildings in England...
Plym Bridge is another example - its in Plymouth and the South Hams, but both listings are in Grade II* listed buildings in Plymouth.--Nilfanion (talk) 02:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Chorlton-cum-Hardy
Could you please delete me from the "Participants" in the Greater Manchester WikiProject; this is because of recent developments at the article Chorlton-cum-Hardy.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 20:09, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Felix, I've not followed the developments around that article though I am aware there has been some discussion about it. I've done as you requested, and I hope things sort themselves out. Nev1 (talk) 15:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help; as a contributor to Chorlton-cum-Hardy for a long time t is sad to see how things have gone over the last few days.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- From what I can see things have only got worse; it seems the two editors who have been busy on that article have no interest in collaboration or discussion.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- What it seems like to me is that you have no interest in writing an article that conforms to WP:UKCITIES, which you've clearly never read, or if you have, never understood. Eric Corbett 14:09, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- So FFS's idea of collaboration is to visit other people's talk pages complaining about "two editors". This editor is happy to collaborate with anyone who wishes to improve the article as I know is Eric. FFS has shown no inclination to discuss anything other than keeping it as it was and telling admins how awful those "two editors" are. If FFS has something to say about me he can say it on my talk page instead of running round looking for someone to come and sort me out. J3Mrs (talk) 22:20, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- FFS simply wishes to have us blocked/banned, simple as that. Then he can can revert to his trivia essay on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. Eric Corbett 22:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- None of what is claimed above is true; I have no wish to contribute any more on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. No-one else has objected to what is now being called "trivia" and those who wish to criticize my work should look at the whole of my contributions to articles in the Greater Manchester WikiPeroject. The behaviour of these two editors is more of a problem than the abridgement of the article.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 19:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
- So FFS's idea of collaboration is to visit other people's talk pages complaining about "two editors". This editor is happy to collaborate with anyone who wishes to improve the article as I know is Eric. FFS has shown no inclination to discuss anything other than keeping it as it was and telling admins how awful those "two editors" are. If FFS has something to say about me he can say it on my talk page instead of running round looking for someone to come and sort me out. J3Mrs (talk) 22:20, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- What it seems like to me is that you have no interest in writing an article that conforms to WP:UKCITIES, which you've clearly never read, or if you have, never understood. Eric Corbett 14:09, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- From what I can see things have only got worse; it seems the two editors who have been busy on that article have no interest in collaboration or discussion.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help; as a contributor to Chorlton-cum-Hardy for a long time t is sad to see how things have gone over the last few days.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grade II* listed buildings in Berkshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wellington College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 18:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Nev1, where are you? Pleeease come over to the Middle Ages talk page. I am becoming increasingly persistent about getting that reproduction object removed as the lead image. Ealdgyth is having to put up with me, which must be horrible!
I have made three suggestions, and if the major contributors to the article could just settle on one of them (or any other genuine artefact) the problem would be solved. Amandajm (talk) 04:15, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Photographer's Barnstar |
| Thanks for using my photo on the St. John's Kennington page. YellowFratello (talk) 07:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC) |
Carlisle Cathedral
Prompted by your change, I looked at all the images and found some recent uploads, better than the previous horizontal and also better than that fisheye shot, which had been much altered and looked bad at high resolution. I found one of good resolution which fits the bill. I then cropped the horizontal shot of all the shadows, so we just have that magnificent window. They look good side-by-side. Amandajm (talk) 07:30, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Nev, is this still a work in progress? I was about to add St Paul's Church, Hooton, which has recently been upgraded from II to II*, and discovered that there are a number of missing items, one near to me being The Old Vicarage in Frodsham (LEN 1253364). Do you wish me to add any I come across? If so, what is the default order? I have not been able to work that out. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:53, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- The list is still a work in progress but I should have a bit more time to spend on it now. Feel free to add any you come across which have been missed off. The default order is simply one which I received second hand, so am happy to go with anything else. Shall we go alphabetical by building name? If so, I'll sort that out. Nev1 (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- FWIW I think the lists are best ordered by Location (which is usually the parish) by default. That makes more sense to me: (a) it groups together related or nearby buildings, and (b) the names used by EH are often inconsistent, incomplete or peculiarly chosen (e.g. "Church of..." or "Parish church of..." are often used more or less randomly). Sorting alphabetically by building name doesn't have many advantages IMO (though of course the reader can sort however they like). I've reordered some Derbyshire lists that were ordered otherwise; in some cases buildings in the same complex were scattered through a list. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- Looking again, the current sorting is more or less by location. It sorts by location until you reach the first entry for Chester, then things get a bit more disorganised, though most are still for Chester. Peter, how does sorting by location sound to you? I can tidy that up. Nev1 (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Edinburgh Castle GAN
I was going to draw this to your attention but I see you are already on the case! Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 14:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- I'm glad to see the article at GAN, I'm sure it will get through without much trouble. I'll keep an eye on it and chip in where I'm able. Nev1 (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
User:Ag6858
You blocked him about a year and a half ago. He's now requesting unblock, admitting that whatever he did was stupid and now he can contribute more productively. Could you take a look? Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for letting me know, I would have completely missed it otherwise. Nev1 (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you recently semi-protected Shiba Inu on 19 September. This was meant to expire on the 10 October, however it is still protected. Mistake? George8211 conversations 17:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi George8211, the page is unprotected at the moment, but the template which produces the padlock in the top right corner was still there. It's not preventing people from edit, it's just there because it adds the page to a category. User:DumbBOT usually removes these templates but for some reason didn't this time. I've removed it by hand. Nev1 (talk) 09:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:52, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)