User talk:Sitush/Archive22

Spelling

Hmm, I honestly wasn't aware that "medallist" was the UK spelling, and actually thought it was just a common typo instead (such as "mispelled" and "misspelled"). I'm very aware of the differences between American and English spelling, but obviously that was one variant that escaped me. :) Feel free to revert my edit or better still, reword the content as you see fit. Thanks. Acalamari 16:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did go ahead and add your suggestion, though you're more than welcome to improve it. Thanks for your civility and understanding as well: that helps a lot. Acalamari 17:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Glad to know that we're all satisfied with the result. :) Thanks! Acalamari 17:56, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Lobsang Rampa

If you were selling the meditation record, I would be interested in buying it. It is hard to say what it is worth, so ask an expert if needs be.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I am in the UK. I could offer £5 plus postage if this was OK.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:17, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Join us?

Hello, Sitush/Archive22! Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's Greater Manchester-related articles. Given the interest we're assuming you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Greater Manchester? It's a user-group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all Greater Manchester-related content. There is a discussion page for sharing ideas as well as developing and getting tips on improving articles. The project has in-house specialists to support and facilitate your ideas. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We hope to be working with you in the future!

--Jza84 |  Talk  01:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Whitefield

No worries, even experienced editors get the templates wrong sometimes. I put all the information you left on my talk page and put it in, it looks like this:

• Wilson, John F (1979), A History of Whitefield, John F Wilson, ISBN 0950679518

If you put that in a bibliography section at the end of the references section, you can then refer to that book over and over again (any page) without having to include all the info about the book. The way I do this, although there are several, is "Wilson (1979), p. 1." That way, you get the page number, and just have to flick to the bibliography for the book. Nev1 (talk) 01:59, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed your note about the old pre-WW1 images of Whitefield. It would be excellent if you could upload them. I've already created a commons category here, if you don't have a wikimedia commons account you need to go into 'your preferences' and create a global account. If you need help uploading anything, drop me a line. As for licensing, if the author has been dead for 70+ years, its copyright free. If no author is known, copyright expired 1938 (70 years ago). Well, in a nutshell that's it. If any of the images need repairing, I can do that for you once they've been uploaded. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Sitush/Archive22, and welcome to Wikiproject Greater Manchester! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Greater Manchester Project Wikipedian! As a project we aim to have all our articles comply with the various editing policies and guidelines. If you are contributing to an article, it is good practice to ensure that it's properly referenced with reliable sources, otherwise any contentious content may be removed by another editor. A good starting point for articles about settlements in Greater Manchester is the WP:UKCITIES guideline. If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your ideas. Again, welcome, and happy editing!

--Jza84 |  Talk  22:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

You seem really keen, and we're desperately short of ethusiastic, level headed users (as you seem to be!). If you're really keen on working on Whitefield, Greater Manchester and allowing the content to flourish towards our formal tiers of assessment (at WP:GA and WP:FA), I'm quite sure the Greater Manchester WikiProject will help you all the way. Wikipedia can be an incredibly satisfying site to build in your spare time. :)

Just thought it might be worth pointing out the page entitled Help:Watching pages. Creating a watchlist can help you spot what changes and comments are being made, where and by who. It's very helpful for keeping an eye on articles, people and pages that are of interest to you. Just thought that worth a mention! Again, good luck, we're all here for you. --Jza84 |  Talk  02:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Ta. Replied on your talk page. Sitush (talk) 02:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. You're doing great! Don't worry about messing up anything, its quite encouraged to be bold! With regards to Whitefield, my honest advice is get a hold of a local history book or two and build away! WP:UKCITIES is the guideline to which settlements are (generally) to be structured, but looking at other examples from this list will undoubtly give you ideas too. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  02:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

hidden text

When it comes to the finished article, its Wikipedia:Manual of Style that tends to be important. It was only a suggestion as to how to proceed, nothing more :) The homepage for the church would likely be considered reliable as it would probably be fairly authoritative. Parrot of Doom (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated clarification, thanks Sitush (talk) 02:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Whitefiled

It's always good to hear how people are doing, and I'm glad to know you're still interested in the article. I look forward to seeing the new information added to the article. When you mentioned Stand Chapel, I began wondering whether it would be worth it's own article, checking if the chapel was on our lists of listed buildings and scheduled monuments, and was getting rather worried that a 17th century building may have been omitted. Then I thought about checking the Whitefield article, it's a shame it was demolished. A microcosm of how people could use Wikipedia I suppose. The article's coming on very well. Nev1 (talk) 01:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Whitefield, Greater Manchester

I reckon a few days of tweaking and this will be good for WP:GAN. What do you think? Parrot of Doom (talk) 10:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester June Newsletter, Issue XVI

Delivered on 3 June 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 14:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester July Newsletter, Issue XVII

Delivered on 4 July 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 20:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester August Newsletter, Issue XVIII

Delivered on 5 August 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 18:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sitush, are you still with us?

Hi Sitush, I noticed you haven't posted for quite a while. Hopefully you're still able to do so. If so, I noticed one article you once had an interest in has turned into a bit of a "puff-piece" (ie advertisement) for its subject - Matt Monro Jnr. I'll contact the relevant editor if needs be, but thought you might like to first. Regards, Revera (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I've done some editing of the thing and will perform a very big edit shortly if there is no attempt to cite etc. Thanks for reminding me, Sitush (talk) 15:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad (well, relieved actually) to know you're still around! (and thanks for getting in touch with the editor who is evidently a bigger fan of Matt Monro Jr than of Wikipedia!)Revera (talk) 21:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Acather96's talk page.
Message added 17:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

cites and templates

I see you've had help from elsewhere regarding cite templates. If you use the edit toolbar, then selecting 'cite' and 'templates' gives you an easy way to add the basic cite templates. The specialised ones you've encountered will still need to be done by hand.

Using 'Show preview' will help to avoid formatting errors passing unnoticed; and using 'Show changes' may help you find the cause of strange errors, although you'll need to be careful as differences due to space characters are not always obvious.

When adding/editing a reference within a section, a useful trick is to temporarily add {{Reflist}} at the end of the section, as that will display the refs for you to check. Don't forget to remove the template before you save your edits!

If you need further help, feel free to drop a note on my talk page... -- EdJogg (talk) 12:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I knew I'd missed a ] somewhere but couldn't see it when I went back in - you'd already fixed it. There is a reprint of an early Churchill's catalogue online at http://vios1.rdg.ac.uk/olib/images/nof/scm/trade_literature/tr_scm_p2_b240/ - don't know what the copyright status is though to upload the cover. NtheP (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I've been speaking with the Librarian at MERL re: the catalogue scans you refer to. No definite outcome yet. MERL are responsible for the Reading Rural Studies Centre stuff since it shut down.Sitush (talk) 20:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Just a thought - while I try to wear down the librarians regarding the image, can the article not link to the relevant image pages on the university site? I ask because it provides a primary source for inserting at least one of the early trading addresses of the company & this in turn is helpful for validating patent applications etc. Sitush (talk) 09:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

There's a template {{External media}} which you can use for this. There's an example at steam shovel#History (US) (although, for some reason, the linked URL is not letting me follow the link to view the image). Very useful for getting round copyright problems! (Note that it is preferred to have a locally-available free-access image.) -- EdJogg (talk) 10:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a thought and thanks for the suggestion - I'm learning a LOT of new stuff from you guys at the moment. Using that template would bring the image into the WP page, which is not strictly necessary IMO. I was thinking more of a sentence "Early catalogues show the address as being XYZ" and a citation to the relevant webpage containing the scan at University of Reading/MERL + an attribution. I have an email here from MERL which in essence gives permission to use the image, with suitable attribution, on WP itself but the license is too restrictive as it limits publication to the WP article only. I can live without the image itself for now while I debate further with them but the content of it (ie: the verification of trading address) could be quite significant for other stuff I have waiting to go. Sitush (talk) 14:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It's all a learning experience, after 4 years I'm still learning loads about editing let alone the knowledge. Of course some would say that us "amateurs" and scientists should not attempt to write about anything historical as we are unqualified, you I'm so glad to say do not fall into that category and appreicate the collaborative approach. It's a pleasure to work with you. NtheP (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow. {{External media}} allows you to add a link directly to some external file, with some accompanying text, but it doesn't load the image (as would be the case for embedding a URL in HTML code). Readers can then follow the link to see the image if they wish, and no copyright issues arise. The same template may be used for audio and video files (mixed if needed).

On the other hand, your suggestion of a cited reference would work better in terms of your article text content (use {{cite web}}).

BTW, obtaining copyright permission (at Commons) requires following a particular procedure, and particular email wording, and, as you rightly note, requires the originator to allow full use (including commercial) of the image concerned.

EdJogg (talk) 17:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Churchill Machine Tool Company

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Awarded for your fine effort at salvaging Churchill Machine Tool Company from the abyss of AfD. RoninBK T C 07:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

ANI

Excellent comments. NtheP (talk) 09:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed...and please 'hang on in there'.

I have interacted with numerous other editors during my 4+ years here, and the vast majority (excluding out-and-out vandals or unregistered users) are decent, friendly folk, willing to listen and learn, as well as warn and advise. As with any human endeavour, you may well encounter other editors whose views or working methods are at odds with yours, or whose manner is somewhat blunt (which can appear almost aggressive in this impersonal environment). At WP, unless both parties take care, such encounters can often end in an edit war, a slanging match, a user block, or an editor walking off in a huff, never to return.

Having had my fingers burnt a couple of times, I try now to step back from such encounters rather than engage in conflict. When a particular editor is attacking your edits to a particular article, the nature of WP is that you can usually play the long game and return to apply your changes at a later date, by which time your obstacle most likely will be focussing his interest elsewhere, or will have been causing so much grief that he will have been blocked from editing.

In your case now, I would suggest that some time off-Wiki, or some WP editing in different subject areas (or simply some random Wikignoming) will help you recover your composure. The dust should have settled on the present discussions in a week or two, and you'll be able to work on your stuff in peace. From the little I have looked at, you have the right qualities to be a good editor and you produce good results. It would be a shame if these recent encounters made you give up on WP.

EdJogg (talk) 12:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks you both. As long as there is no further disruption to the bit I'm currently working on I am going to leave that AN/I discussion alone now. Said my piece. If there is disruption then I may need to seek admin advice because I guarantee you there is no plagiarism of MJH output on that page - it'd be difficult to plagiarise when the person we think is MJH actually said when raising the AfD that a four or five sentence article was unlikely to be capable of expansion, so I s/b safe. Sitush (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

If there is an allegation of that, then that really will be petty-mindedness or even just vandalism. Leaving the AN/I alone is a good move too. NtheP (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

An interesting point from WP:V in the light of recent events: "Be mindful of copyright: do not copy text from copyrighted sources, or paraphrase too closely, without in-text attribution." The "without in-text attribution" bit leaves things wide open even though the footnote does encourage editors to avoid if possible. Sitush (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, a very interesting one - when does something stop being a paraphrase and become your own composition? When something like the Dobson and Barlow episode is a chronology and fairly bullet point it's quite difficult to be different. NtheP (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Connections across the water

Congratulations on finding the connection between Willis Churchill of "Augerville" and Charles Churchill of Churchill Machine Tool Company. Nice work! The story of machine-tool makers moving between North America and Britain is a particularly interesting element.

I took the liberty of making a few edits to the article to clarify the U.S. side of things. County names here don't generally figure in the names of places, so "New Haven" is not part of the location name.

Regarding the name "Augerville": it is common for neighborhoods in New England to bear names related to the industries that were there in the 19th century. The first half of the 19th century (the era of the Industrial Revolution in America) led to the development of many industrial villages in New England (wherever water power was available), consisting of one or more factories plus the homes of the workers. Since the only prior history in these areas consisted of at most a few generations' occupancy by small farmers, the names of the industrial villages became the names of the places where they were situated. Few such names are the official (legal) names of towns, because the organisation of towns was mostly completed in the decades before the industries arrived.

I think you are correct that Charles Churchill would be little remembered in the place of his birth. I believe that the industrial enterprise started by Ives (Willis Churchill's one-time apprentice) a few miles upstream was much more prominent -- and survived longer than Churchill's enterprise did. The area around Augerville is now thickly settled and the factory buildings are long-gone, so I think the Augerville name is little-remembered there. The old identities of the old industrial villages of New England seem to survive longer in rural towns. --Orlady (talk) 05:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

File:American Machinist vol 38 27-Feb-1913 Churchill grinder built Pendleton built.png

Hi, the file needs a bit more information adding to it. If you have access to the issue of American Machinist does it name the photographer at all? Either with the photo or in the journal elsewhere. If not, it doesn't matter as the photo can be labelled unknown but something needs to go in. Secondly I think the licence is slightly wrong. At 98 years old and with an unknown photographer it's obvious that this image is out of copyright, but i don't think the right template is currently on there. Assuming you're not the copyright holder, unless there is evidence to the contrary we can't use the template you have used as we don't know that the copyright holder has granted permission. However as it is from 1913 and was published in the US (the name of the magazine is a bit of a giveaway :-) ) then {{PD-US}} applies without question, so I've changed the licence to that. I know it sounds really pedantic but the whole issue of copyright on wp is a minefield (something you-know-who fell foul off) and I don't want the Wikilawyers getting at you too. NtheP (talk) 09:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think it was right but had to make a start somewhere safe in the knowledge that I would get corrected, so thanks for that. I've managed to extract 3 or 4 others from American Machinist, all pre-1923. As you say Am Mach was a US publication. The copy, and numerous others, are available for anyone to see via arhive.org or hathitrust.org - and I did check that the copyright situation on those sites said it was public domain. I scoured for photo attributions but there are none, even in the usual places such as the section where the mag publishes its own printing details etc. To be honest, this particular one has the ring of being a Churchill PR photograph, but who knows for sure. I think I need to figure out how to enter the "unknown" name - I found the whole process a bit scary tbh because I am aware of the (necessary) pedantry that surrounds these things. I'll take a look at the licence to which you have changed it, just to familiarise myself. It isn't a great photo anyway, nor are the others which I have. But in the absence of anything else so far ... Sitush (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Believe me, I still tread very cautiously round this whole area. What I found helped was having a look at the templates in Category:Public domain copyright templates to see which if any apply to an image. Also if an image is in the public domain uploading it to Commons allows it's reuse across all wikis not just this one. It's the same principles but Commons really does specialise in images etc so the tools to help with uploading are IMO better. NtheP (talk) 12:00, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll check the templates. As far as Commons goes, I did consider it but there was quite a large proviso which concerned me when I looked at the process (can't recall what it was now but it'll have been something to do with copyright!) The proviso discouraged me and indeed pretty much suggested that I avoid uploading it there. I'd presume that something can be moved over to Commons at a later date but will look into it. I really am treating this whole area with a great deal of trepidation. Appreciate your continued input - blagged the conversion citation template off your user page earlier this morning and got it to work 1st time after a little reading up, so I'm learning summat. Sitush (talk) 12:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks daunting at first but like most things you can get the gist of it after a while. Certainly there is no problem moving files over at a later date, so if you're happier uploading images here then continue to do so and they'll move later. Glad you got {{Convert}} to work, it's so widespread in what it will deal with that it can be a tricky little bugger at times :-) NtheP (talk) 13:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Good morning (it's still evening here, but I believe it's the middle of the night for you). I have nominated Churchill Machine Tool Company‎ for the Wikipedia Did you know? feature -- because I think your good work deserves attention. See Template talk:Did you know#Churchill Machine Tool Company for the nomination. --Orlady (talk) 03:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Middle of the night here, yes; but I am suffering badly from tinnitus of late (I am profoundly deaf) and my sleep pattern has gone very weird as a consequence. Doing this thing is keeping me as sane as I will ever be. Thanks for the nomination. I'm not sure how it works but I'll read around. Sitush (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I hope you are getting some sleep tonight. I have never had tinnitus, but I know it can be awful.

In response to your request on my talk page, I merged the reference callouts for you. The trick (at least the trick I know) is to expand the "ref" parameter for the first callout to include the "name" parameter and a unique name for the source; then for the remaining callouts cite the ref name instead of the full reference. Thus, I changed <ref> to <ref name=JeremyonGabriel> for the first callout to that source. For subsequent citations, I replaced the entire reference callout with <ref name=JeremyonGabriel/> (in these subsequent citations, the forward slash is needed at the end). Note that I rendered the name as a continuous string -- if the name includes spaces, it must be surrounded by quotation marks, as in <ref name="Jeremy on Gabriel"> --Orlady (talk) 04:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)