User talk:Tmol42/Archive

Created Archive page for User talk: Tmol42

Indenting

It doesn't look like you meant to reply to me here: [1], so would you mind changing the indenting or where you inserted the comment, or could I do it for you, otherwise it may confuse. thanks. John Hayes^talk 11:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks got caught in an edit conflict in the rush to post a comment, have eventually got it right, more of an editor than a blogger as you can see!Tmol42 (talk) 11:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ;) John Hayes^talk 11:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Reverting my previous edit

The edit I made in Talk:Tottenham Hotspur F.C., was an edit of my previous post where I hadn't signed in and did not have my user name attributed to it. Surely, I am able to correct my own contributions? Is that within the Wikipedia rules? (Atouraya (talk) 01:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC))

That may be the case but it was clear when I checked that someone on 81.178.248.233 had also been posting during the sme periods both in the past as well as last night including a separate recent post to Tottenham Hotspur F.C. which was not 'corrected' and there is no way to distinguish a correction from a rougue edit. My comment on your site was polite and as set out in WP guidelines. The correct approach was not to just amend the edit as you did but to explain the situation. Anonymous edits such as those signed under 81.178.248.233 are always treated with more caution, particularly on a site which has been subject to a large number of ad hoc anonymous edits over the last 24 hours following the Carling cup win. In future you should ensure you sign in / sign your contributions. We are all human and make mistakes but its important that you make your edits transparent. : -)

Tmol42 (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Possible Canvassing

Asking someone who clearly shares your viewpoint on a matter can be considered canvassing. If you have sent out a notice on an issue you need to at least record this fact somewhere such as in actual discussion page for the topic in question.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Canvassing for more information.

Thanks --Shakehandsman (talk) 22:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Completly OTT - 1. neutral request 2. no reference to opinions on issue 3. no evidence of a viewpoint shared or otherwise. but made me smile ;-) Tmol42 (talk) 23:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Not OTT in the slightest as I stated it is possible canvasing. It might be a neutral request but given you deleted my edit it is blatantly obvious what your opinion is. Best practice is to at least record who you have contacted regarding an issue, otherwise you do leave yourself open to allegations of canvassing. Additionally you have not even engaged in a discussion of the issue itself yet still took the time to contact others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakehandsman (talk • contribs) 23:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Railway time

A title of UserTmol42/Sandbox1 was a namespace violation so something had to be done. On a brief inspection, it seemed eminently ready to become an article so I have moved it to railway time. In this case I think capitalisation may be appropriate: Railway Time. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, You may have caused me some embarressment here I am afraid. I was consulting with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tamil Nadu on potentially moving this to that site but this required breaking the exisitng redirections. I may have violated some wiki guideline inadvertently having thought I had only adopted a similar approach to other editors but a check with me first might have meant i could have rectified the situation. In my view this was just a first stab at the article and I was looking to do some checking on text and references first. Please can you advise how we can reverse this and locate my draft somewhere where i can work on it and await advice from the project team, Thanks Tmol42 (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

No need for you to be embarrassed - just blame it on me! The material covered by your article seems perfectly correct for the railway time title. There was little justification for redirecting to Madras time. I have seem the feeling expressed that articles should be moved into the article namespace as soon as possible because Wikipedia is collaborative. If you insist on continuing to sandbox it, then you can move it back to User:Tmol42/Sandbox1 yourself. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

My boat race edit

Thank you for not taking any further action because I do believe someone else, who has been vandalising Wikipedia, has the same IP address as me or something. However, the edit to the boat race was mad by me and i don't see why it is viewed as vandalism; all i did was change the format of the latest result to be consistent with that of previous results (i.e. Oxford wins are highlighted in dark blue) --212.120.248.142 (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I see now what I did. Let me assure you it was an accident and not vandalism. --212.120.248.142 (talk) 17:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Cholesbury

Hi. You might want to check the diff of Talk:Cholesbury, where you will find I didn't rate the article, contrary to your rather brisk claims (WP:AGF?). I'm not going to get involved in any length of conversation with you, but you need to make sure that what you're accusing someone of is what they actually done. Also, please don't mess up my talk page by placing your note at a level 3 header, just use the [+] button to add a new comment, have the courtesy to leave a summary with your edit, and use the preview button to avoid making repeated edits. Severo^TC 22:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I was a little sharp there. I've just had a few people lately ask me to explain something I haven't done! Severo^TC 22:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Article assessment

I'm afraid I know nothing about article assessment. I would bring this up at the project's talk page. -- Roleplayer (talk) 23:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

El Tel

Hey Tmol42, I've reverted the most recent IP edit. As far as I'm concerned, there's no verifiable evidence provided in that link and we shouldn't have to pay to see the links. It's tough because there's potential for the source to be reliable, for sure, but it can't be verified without payment which, in my opinion, makes it fail verifiability. Indeed, if this is significant then there should be a suitable, free alternative to verify the claim. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Comprehensive long lists‎ discussion

Hello, I noticed that you took part in the recent FLRC for List of Arsenal F.C. players and thought you might be interested in participating in a new discussion. The FLRC was closed as no consensus and it is clear the the issue of incompleteness in longer FLs is not over, so a discussion page has been started here. Please feel free to comment. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Tottenham Hotspur F.C. Season 2007-08

For the stats on the main Spurs page, Yeah I do feel that they would be better on the season page, since they are for the 2007-08 season, and it would be good to have all that information on the same place...about the commentary, because this is the first 'live' season paage and it was made more than half way through, I think people just continued listing the news on the main page out of habit so the duplication happen, I think when next season comes around and the season page is there from the start, I think the separation between detail and brief will come about naturally and if not, then it can talked about at the beginning of next season...I don't think the 2008-09 page can made now, because although the big news of modric signing it would still be a page of empty headings right now you know but not long after the season ends it could take shape...so about immediate matter, Yeah I agree that the stats should be on the season page, thanks, Prem4eva (talk) 17:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Polyphosphate edit

I noticed you removed my polyphosphate section addition on the abiogenesis page. Why? Is it improper to link to a book so that people can read the actual model in detail? Should I have put a reference to the book with no link (title, year, etc)? Others seem to link to web pages of books and papers. What might I do to make it acceptable (in your opinion)? The abiogenesis page is in pretty sorry shape in my opinion. Another paragraph on polyphosphate and its possible role in abiogenesis seems more than justified.

Also, what is your expertise in polyphosphate and abiogenesis? Polyp2 (talk) 04:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Chelsea F.C.

Hi. Why did you revert my edit to the talk page? This was hardly a constructive contribution. SteveO (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay no worries. Cheers. SteveO (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Howard Webb

Why did you revert my edition? I've wroten it, because this is true - if you want, I can search sources, which will be accepct with my commentary. Alden or talk with Alden 22:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Webb

Could you please elaborate why you deleted the information provided by me? It was cited by all major Polish portals, including Wirtualna Polska, which is among top information portals of the country, I can provide tens of sources for it. Do not do it next time, as this is relevant and properly cited info. Tymek (talk) 17:41, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Anyway, this is not really important and I am not going to argue, as the Poland - Croatia game is starting soon and this is on my mind now. Tymek (talk) 18:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits by Obiwanskywalker

Robbie Keane will be a Liverpool player by tuesday boy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by87.194.210.30 (talk) 20:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I have recieved a message saying that my contibitutions were vandalism, when I was adding players, their countries and statistics, as the page was maent to be expanded. I would like to know how this contributes as vadalism.

Thanks

Obiwanskywalker

Hi take a look at your edit to List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. players, it left the page in a bit of a mess to be frank and you added a small amount of incorrect information. I have tied it a bit but it still needs a little more mmaintenance. As you had not corrected it was reverted and a polite message as per WP guidelines was added suggesting you take care with your edits and to use the sandbox if you need to test your edits first. Fine if it was a mistake on your behalf, and we all make errors from time to time, but the message was still appropriate, good luck Tmol42 (talk) 12:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks, I will try to be a bit more tidy next time. I admit that I did make a mistake or two, and because of that I am sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obiwanskywalker (talk • contribs) 10:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the template for the Ivory Coast, I can not seem to find it, if you respond then I will be able to tidy up the list of tottenham hotspur players page.

Obiwanskywalker (talk) 21:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Try using Ivory Coast I think it should work but you need to check the piping ( | ) carefully as it gets lost with the brackets ( {{ ) Also you need to crt the spelling of DZ, good luck Tmol42 (talk) 21:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks, I have done that now, but have encountered another problem: flag of morroco. what link shouold I use? I have tried:{{flagcountry|Morroco}} and {{flagcountry|Kingdom of Morroco}} but neither of those seem to work.

--Obiwanskywalker (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers for all of you help, I have now finished editing that page. The only link that does not work is the one for the brazillian left back gilberto. It does not seem to like the link, I do not whether this is because a page does not exist or if I am just spelling his name wrong. Get back to me if possible about this. --Obiwanskywalker (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I hadn't relised what the criteria for the notable players was, thanks for telling me.

--Obiwanskywalker (talk) 13:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Does Luca Modric count as a notable player? As he has agreed to play for the club and has played for Croatio after this agreement. I am not sure whether becuase of this he would be a notable player, or whether he would have to have played for us/taken part in training at WHL for him to count as a notable player --Obiwanskywalker (talk) 10:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

In response to "Objections to Evolution"

I don't understand how my edit was non-neutral.

my edit; "however, the argument is not just that the flagellum is complex! The bacterial flagellum, says Behe, could not work without about 40 protein components all organized in the right way and only about 10 of the 40 components can be explained by co-option, but the other 30 are brand new. Also, the very process of assembly in the right sequence requires other regulatory machines, so is in itself irreducibly complex."

Please also explain how it can be considered vandalism.

66.74.230.117 (talk) —Precedingcomment was added at 01:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

"I could also comment on the nature and content of your edits but will leave it there."

No, go ahead. I gave a reference, I didn't go on a rampage, I didn't keep a certain point of view. I just added information that needed to be there to inform people what the argument was really about, that it's so complex that there couldn't have been co-option in acquiring the other 30 components. I'm also sorry for inserting the hidden comments, it wont happen again.66.74.230.117 (talk) 14:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes for CPs in MK

Maybe I did over-react a bit, but I still feel that the full UK-settlement template is completely OTT for an urban CP. I think we need a different template. I'll take it to the UK Geography Project. Meanwhile, you could reinstate the infoboxes but I suggest that you look hard at which elements it is sensible to populate. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I've opened a discussion at Template talk:Infobox England and Wales civil parish to discuss the appropriate infobox for urban CPs. You might like to comment there. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I've retracted my comment

There must be a problem with the system because the first 6 or eight times I checked on that user, it showed no contributions and no deleted contributions. It was only after Hut blocked him/her that the edits appeared. Thanks for your contributions.Toddst1 (talk) 20:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The Historical Parish of Monks Risborough

Just a thought again on Whiteleaf. I anticipate that a previous and occasional editor will no doubt shortly seek to reverse these changes as it has removed their references to the ecclesiastical parish. Previously I have reverted these edits. If this editor attempts to undo the tidying up again as before I was hoping you may be able to help and also broaden the debate as it is always best to avoid a 1:1 debate which tends to lead to edit warring etc. From my point of view I will again reiterate two key points that it is clear from the guidelines for settlements that the reference to 'parish' should be for the avoidance of doubt the administrative parish i.e. civil parish being the relevant administrative authority for the village or hamlet. WP guidelines set out in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Consistency also stresses the importance of consistency across and within articles retaining the style and conventions already established. Anyway I would be interested in your views. Cheers Tmol42 (talk) 23:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Tmol42, thanks for the message. To be honest I am not bothered about the ecclesiastical / civil parish distinction per se. However, in my research into the history of Monks Risborough one of the most salient, indeed WP:notable facts, about the place is that it is the oldest recorded parish in Enland. 903. Much older than the civic parish, and very unusual - for how many other parishes do we have records from 903 vs. 1930's? I believe that deserves some mention right in the first section of the Monks Risborough article. And places within the boundaries of this ancient parish - Whiteleaf for example - well it seems to me reasonable to mention the relationship as a notable thing too. We do not need to refer to an ecclesiastical parish. We can leave in the reference to the civic parish. People recording information (like we are now) over 1,100 years ago wrote down the boundaries of Monks Risborough. I think that is something that most people who are interested in Monks Risborough would read and think was interesting and special. I would also point you to ignore all rules. I fear that this rule may be standing in the way of improving the Monks Risborough article. The main reason that I have not done this edit to Monks Risborough is that I fear the edit will be immediately reversed because of the rule. Also, there are clear references all over the web to MR being the oldest recorded parish, but given the contentious nature of this issue, unsure as to whether you or others will require a stronger standard of proof. I would like to better understand your point of view on this too, so please let me know :-).Finereach (talk) 07:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Richard Spratly

• Many thanks! I'm glad I didn't write this all for nothing, eh? ;-) These dates mostly match the times he would have been in the area. In 1841 he did return to port. However, today I discovered that a butcher named Richard Spratly in Chesham charged someone with stealing beef in 1807! It could be that the Captain is a Richard Spratly Junior or Captain Spratly was just very old. I'm guessing his father may also be named Richard. Could you send me a link or scan of your reference? -Knowl -<(I am questing for Knowledge!) (talk) 05:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

• • Thanks very much for your help! I'll be sure to get this added in later today. I have found that the spelling changes to Spratley on official documents, but Spratly himself spells it correctly of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge Incarnate (talk • contribs) 19:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference Desk

Hello. I noticed you reverted one of my comments on the reference desk, without making any note of why you had done so. Why was this? 79.66.56.21 (talk) 21:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

A Fatuous, off topic and irrelevant comment needs no further explanationTmol42 (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. You must be very busy, since almost everyone makes a few off topic, 'irrelevant' comments on the answers on the desks; it's part of what keeps the spirit up and the community contributing. If I had made such a comment in response to the original question, that would have been different.

As to fatuous, I fail to see how. I was amused to see the Daily Mail conforming so strongly to stereotype, and took the opportunity to provide social feedback to encourage contributions. It also served as a way of bringing up the nature of the Daily Mail, since it was being used as a source for common usage; someone who is unfamiliar with UK newspapers would not know of the reputation of the Daily Mail, and thus would not know if they were likely to use a scholarly term without it being common usage. They would then have asked 'what do you mean, classic Daily Mail' or have looked it up. They would then have been further enlightened as to the extent that glis glis is a common name for the edible dormouse in the UK. But you removed the comment, so that is unlikely to have happened.

Do you only remove such comments from users who have not signed in? 79.66.56.21 (talk) 17:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Little Chalfont

Thanks for your note. I have replied at Talk:List of civil parishes in Buckinghamshire. Nice to know someone's taking note! Skinsmoke (talk) 12:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:Current sport

For some reason it's pretty hard to get people to actually comment, so since you reverted my edit, I invite you to voice your opinion at Template talk:Current sport#Adding & applying guidelines. :) --Conti|✉ 16:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

12+

I work in the education service in Bucks. Have I missed something? I'm certain the 12+ system is still in place. -- role^player 12:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry that should read 11+. D'oh! -- role^player 12:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Roleplayer's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Category Generation

OK, a break. I have replied you: Let's talk about that, please, on my page (Category Generation) Franta Oashi (talk) 23:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

John E.S. Lawrence

Thanks for the message. The move was just to make the title consistent with the lead paragraph. Had the lead referred to him as "J.E.S. Lawrence" I would have moved it to that title (adding a space between the "S" and "Lawrence"). The article still needs some work though. If I have time I will take another look at it in a day or so. – ukexpat (talk) 18:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Tottenham Hotspur

Thanks for your message, but I think you'll find it's User:RM-Taylor who changed the squad numbers. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I completely got that wrong... It would appear (to me at least) number 16 will be Naughton's squad number, with him wearing it in a game in which the other players are wearing their officially designated numbers. However, with his number not yet being explicitly stated on the official website, it could still be uncertain. I think assuming good faith could well be the best option. Perhaps you could bring it up at WP:FOOTY? (My solution to everything!) Mattythewhite (talk) 21:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hull City A.F.C.

Hi Tmol52. I noticed that you mentioned Twitter was not allowed due to WP:V but I would direct you to WP:SELFPUB as I would imagine that Jozy is an authority as to where he will be playing. Also, you seemed to miss the other ESPNSoccernet.com link mentioned in the edit. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=665365&cc=5901 Garyhampson (talk) 21:54, 05 Aug 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

Hi. Just to say sorry for this edit. I've no idea how I managed to revert your addition - all I was trying to do was remove the flag. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Larry no problem Btw I hate those flags littered everywhere and ENIC is hardly British anyway is it! I have posted a note on the THFC talk page re the the above edit which I will sort now, CheersTmol42 (talk) 22:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and the flag was English, not British, to boot. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Windmills in Bucks

Are you saying that Cholesbury smock mill and Hawridge mill are one and the same? Mjroots (talk) 17:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that info, I'll amagamate the two entries into one, but reflecting both names. Mjroots (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Bongomatic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

^Bongo_matic 14:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Your note

I'll look around for sources, though I can't promise to devote myself to it. :) It looks like a nice article so far. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 17:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Claire Loewenfeld

I have nominated Claire Loewenfeld, 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/Claire Loewenfeld. 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. ^Bongo_matic 04:21, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thank you, that's very kind of you! I was thinking about you today, missing all the excitement. :) But it's all worked out pretty well. I'm going to be interested to see how much more we can find out about her. I suspect quite a lot actually; it's almost certainly just a question of finding the right books. Anyway, well done for all your research, and for starting the article in the first place. :) SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 01:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Vandal reversion

You missed the insertion of massive penises when rolling back vandalism on Human resources. Next time look more closely for vandalism covering vandalism. Fifelfoo (talk) 10:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh what it must be like to be perfect, shame about the redundant warning on the talk pageTmol42 (talk) 10:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Saint

Buckinghamshire was part of Wessex in the Heptarchy. - Yorkshirian (talk) 17:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Chiltern Hills

I hadn't realised how much effort the guy (I assume it's a guy) had put into his fruitless and misguided task until I checked the IP history - seems he's been using more than one, presumably it changes irregularly, or perhaps he has access to more than one PC (maybe at a school or college? Seems it's impossible to convince him that the hills to the east of Streatley are the Berkshire Downs - or perhaps he's just being bloody minded and enjoying his little "joke"? There's already a history of warnings on his talk page, so an IP ban will have to follow if he persists. I could maybe check out the history of his other IPs also - they might well show similar activity on other pages and reveal a few more "sock puppet" addresses. I've checked out a few users that way, and uncovered a "spider's web" of SP userids or IP addresses. Just as well to make a complete job of it. I'll get on it tonight. Yours in frustration Ramble24 (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 20:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC).

Update - I've reported this user for vandalism - we'll see an IP block soon maybe? Rambler24 (talk) 14:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

TH Managers/CGD Chart

Hi Tmol42, I just got your message about the Cumulative Goal Difference chart - not sure why but it only just arrived - it might be because I am using WP Beta on several different computers in various places. So yes - move the chart to where you think best, In general they are used to give an overview of managerial performance, so the managers page was where I put it, but club stats makes sense too... or both maybe. Let me know what you want in way of explanation or re-design. --Payo (talk) 22:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Onboarding

TMol42 - I resisted the temptation to put my currently available books back on the Onboarding page, given the discussions about deleting the whole article and my potential conflict of interest. Instead, I'm hoping you'll put them back. The argument is that they credibly contribute to knowledge. 1) They help people in new ways. "The New Leader's 100-Day Action Plan" helps leaders moving into new positions. "Onboarding" helps people hiring people to move into new positions. 2) Both were published by John Wiley and Sons, the world's largest business publisher. 3) I think your point about "The Total Onboarding Program" is right since it doesn't come out until next summer. It's listing should be delayed.Gbradt (talk) 12:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Gbradt, I see no valid reason for reverting the edits I did which removed details of your own publications. The very fact you request that I do so at a time when your own editing behaviour and various articles with which you are connected are the subject to a COI review suggests to me you have failed yet again to take the advice and read the guidelines regarding COI which have been drawn to your attention. Lobbying me to do so is also a behaviour which is frowned upon by Wikipedia and does nothing to help your case.

Please also note that artciles on Wikipedia are not intended to be best practice guides or personal development tools provided as a guidebook which 'helps leaders moving into new positions'. It is an encyclopaedia and editors should draw on the widest range of secondary sources in the development of articles. You may even be the world's foremost expert on Onboarding but you have no privileged right to have your theories, concepts or books referenced in an article on Wikipedia, nor for articles to be written in a style and with content which mirror your publications. Nor should you automatically expect your forthcoming book will be 'listed' again. That will be dependant on whether other editors without a connection with the publication believe it is appropriate to inlcude it. The fact that another editor who one could reasonable suspect from their editing record might also have a connection with John Wiley, the books' publisher, attempted also to add your published and yet to be published book references back in today (which was quickly reverted again) only adds to one’s suspicions. If the article on Onboarding survives the AFd then please be aware there may well be a judgement taken about how editing will proceed and possibly who may be able to be involved in editing. Once again please take time out to read WP Guidelines. Tmol42 (talk) 22:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Just a thought. It might also help your case and clear the air going forward if you could comment on the suggestion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#User:Gbradt Promoting books by Author George Bradt that there is a connection as described in WP:Conflict of Interest between User:Megvon, User:Heatherbreslin and yourself. This is not advice and it totally your call. Tmol42 (talk) 22:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI

See this edit, we only block if they edit after a final warning. If you have questions leave a note on my talk page. Jeepday (talk) 13:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Jeepday's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Charles Darwin

I note your comment on the talk page of this article to the effect that my comment:

"your persistance in using this word in place of the accepted term "concluded" seems to indicate some agenda. If you don't have an agenda, then it must be either a genuine lack of understanding on your part or sheer bloodymindedness that you continue to use a word that several well-informed and erudite editors have told you is inappropriate"

I am replying to you at the first opportunity, as I have been absent for a few days. What I have written here may seem rude, but in fact, I am seeking to comprehend why an editor would be so persisten in removing a scientific term in favour of a non-scientific term which has a primary meaning other than that intended. It seems clear that there is an agenda here, yet the editor denies this. The whole first paragraph contains inappropriate stuff, but the single word "realised" is an unacceptable way to described a "conclusion" drawn by a scientist after scientific study.

You remark that my point is well argued. The reason is that it comes from a sound base. However, this makes no impression upon the person that I referred to as suffering from either "lack of understanding" or "bloodymindedness". May I ask how you suggest getting this error corrected, when the editor returns the erroneous word every time it is changed?

Please put my use of the above terms down as stemming from my total "lack of understanding" of such behaviour in the face of commonsense and reason, and utter frustration caused by a person who is so persistent at maintaining what is wrong, while denying having an agenda for doing it.

Amandajm (talk) 10:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Amandajm, What you wrote about the editor did not assume good faith and was rude. In my mind there is no excuse for this, regardless of how you felt. Calling someone bloodyminded, having an agenda and lacking understanding sad to say just undermined your own contribution to the point where you were never likely to garner support for the points in your analysis which I perceived you had thought through rationally even if I did not agree with all of it (but that was not my point). I tried to suggest to you that by directing your remarks at this particular editor other editors of this page, including those whose standpoint may be very different from his, are unlikely to hitch their horse to your wagon. At the point where you intervened I could see no consensus for the changes that you suggested, nor has any developed since. If at the time you had acknowledged that your comments on the Talk page had gone too far some credibility might have been recovered. As it is your final comments above perhaps have a rhetorical ring about them. :) Tmol42 (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

"Bloody minded" is undoubtedly rude. However, to suggest that the editor "lacks understanding" is simply a way of excusing the person for that which otherwise must be perceived as "bloody mindedness". I will attempt to put this to right. Amandajm (talk) 08:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

2012 Summer Olympics

Hello Tmol42 why did you delete my post on the olympics 2012 about the song being sung that was true it wasnt fake —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zubair171 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Frankly your six edits to 2012 Summer Olympics here amounted to text which was no more than gibberish, spelling and grammar were v.poor and it was added to the first line of the article. QEDTmol42 (talk) 19:26, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

ok —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zubair171 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

"Troll"

Even when you think it, and I'm not disagreeing with you, it never helps the situation to say it. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Wallander

They are two different film series and having them on the same page is causing confusion. There is no need for discussion or "concensus". Please do not start edit warring. If you have a realistic reason for keeping the articles together, please state it at Talk:Kurt Wallander#Moves?. Bradley0110 (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not edit warring I just reverted your edit once as it without any discussion on the Talk Page as per WP Policy. It is not appropriate to use hyperbole style comments to unesssarily raise the temperature. I have at least added a comments on my action on the Talk Page please follow process to allow concensus Tmol42 (talk) 18:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't accusing you of edit warring, I was asking you not to start edit warring. Bradley0110 (talk) 19:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hm I will take that as apology not a preemptive threat then, thanks for thatTmol42 (talk) 19:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Wallander move

I opened the discussion on this move. The discussion is still open, as far as I'm concerned; if you have any comments I'd like to hear them. Swanny18 (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

PS I've reverted under BRD, for now. Swanny18 (talk) 19:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Resourcing

No problem. Let me (or ANI) know if you see him/her continuing this trick under another account name. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 15:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Spurs and Jimmy Greaves

RE the tottenham hotspur page. they are the last english team to score 100 goals in a season [111] are they the only? the first or last or only team in england to win the 2nd and 1st division titles back to back. i think first. jimmy greaves was the first player to score 100 goals, if that was with spurs that should probably be mentioned. i think that's it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.10.45 (talk) 19:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Spurs were the last team in in Football League to breach the 100 mark scoring 115 in 1960-61. Not sure if anyone else has done the back to back championships apart from Spurs in 1950 and 1951, I'll leave you to check the tables! Jimmy Greaves scored his 100 goals for Chelsea before he signed for Inter Milan and then Spurs in 1961. He was about the 11th player to score 100+ goals and I think 2nd or third to score 200+ for Spurs.Tmol42 (talk) 20:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

yeah thanks. villa have scored the most, 128 or something and sunderland were the first. i'll check the tables..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.10.45 (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2010 (UTC) everton did it in 1932. i might not add anything i mentioned but if you want to do. hey i can't edit the spurs page without an account. someone should add that they are the *last* team to score over 100 goals and the *last* team to win back to back 2nd and 1st division titles, finishing runners up the next year [as the table on that page shows]. also when that's mentioned mention that their manager invented the push and run to win those titles. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.10.45 (talk) 00:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Lists and References

I disagree with you comprehensively. I have reverted your reversion and suggest that you take it to the aticle's talk page rather than engage in a reversion of reversions, etc.

A list must be referenced whether the references are in the article of the listed entity or not. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Unless I am telepathic I could not have anticipated your Talk Page comment at 22;40 twenty minutes after my edit at 22:20 on the article page, there was nothing there when I looked. Also where is the reversion of a revision. I looked at the edit history and could not see any recent relevant history. As to referencing I have re-looked both at Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates and Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists and whilst citations may be useful where the list items may be open to questions of notability or controversy there apprears to be no requirement for them to contain verifiable sources. Please avoid hyperbole it does not help ones arguements Tmol42 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandal's edit to my userpage. Out of interest, do you have any idea what his gibberish actually meant? – PeeJay 16:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather not repeat it online. Try pasting into Bing or Babel fish. I thought at first it was Portuguese given the page the IP had been editing but found the answer on translating from Spanish to English. Not perfect but you get the gist. Might be worth storing it away for a rainy day!! Tmol42 (talk) 16:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Onboarding

With reference to your point on the Onboarding talk page. After the discussion you referred to, and after a discussion about whether or not to delete the article in its entirety, it was decided to keep it and Mandesford drafted an article that lays out the key points in a coherent and understandable fashion.

I'm suggesting we should keep the article encyclopedic and keep out things that promote specific businesses like the direct links to Kaiser and Associates someone has put in their references to a book that has not yet even been published. Are you suggesting that "fairs fair" means we should do something different? I would hope not. A couple of years ago, this article was a hodge-podge of paragraphs promoting a range of onboarding services.

I've sworn off touching this article directly and have asked my various colleagues not to edit it directly to avoid any appearance of conflicts of interest. Having co-authored three books and innumerable articles on the subject and spending all my time thinking about onboarding in conjunction with our firm, PrimeGenesis, I have a long-standing deep interest in onboarding and continue to create new knowledge. (My latest piece is on "Leading through a Crisis - The New Leader's 100-Hour Action Plan"). I plan to continue to monitor the article and make suggestions in its talk page under my own name. I think I'm being open, straightforward and contributing to the common good - with nothing but good faith. Do you have suggestions for better ways for me to be involved?Gbradt (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Are external links to company websites, like the one to Kaiser and Associates, OK now? Gbradt (talk) 09:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Buckinghamshire

Hi, I have made a start at reactivating WikiProject Buckinghamshire after a short break. I am in the process of working on the front page at User:Roleplayer/Sandbox to make it more attractive and easier to navigate. My aim is to make the project a reference point for editors creating or working on Buckinghamshire-related articles.

A couple of days ago I moved anyone who hadn't edited the project in a while from the current members list to an inactive members list, and this includes you. If you are still interested in the project, or are still regularly updating Buckinghamshire articles then please move your name back to the current list (remembering to keep entries in alphabetic order). If you are no longer interested in this project, then you needn't do anything further.

Cheers!

-- role^player 14:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The redesign of the front page is all done bar the colouring. Any suggestions? How about maroon, beige and black? -- role^player 16:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Your new page

You seem to have accidentally created it in the wrong namespace. I moved it to your userspace. The Thing // Talk // Contribs 18:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Civil parishes in England

Hi Tmol42/Archive. Civil parishes in England, an article you have contributed to, has been reassessed to C class from Start class. Apparently many people watch and/or visit this page as an alternative to the broader Civil parishes article. I've quickly scanned it for needing a possible copy edit, but it already looks reasonably good to me. However, I did feel it just needs a little attention such as adding more inline refs. It's not tagged or anything, but if you can help ut with a source or two, it would be much appreciated. Perhaps from your other work on geography articles, you will know where to look, and we will be able to promote it to 'B'.Kudpung (talk) 12:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Bobby Smith

No. All I did was move the place of death from the start of the article to the end. Looking at it again, I can see that it was a misplaced place of birth, so I have amended it in line with your findings. Deb (talk) 12:15, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. The place of birth should not go inside the brackets - that's for dates. Deb (talk) 12:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Onboarding Article

Good catch on the Kool Aid stuff. Glad you're keeping an eye on this Gbradt (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Hawridge

3 minutes to fix the {{dn}} tag against Wigginton. I am impressed! Jan1naD ^{(talk • conrib)} 20:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evolutionism (2nd nomination), since you contributed to the article. Steve Dufour (talk) 02:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Re your edit to Bucks Herald

Are you aware there are two newspapers:

• The Buckinghamshire Advertiser, published weekly and aimed at the Chalfont area
• The Bucks Advertiser, published weekly and delivered for free to homes in Aylesbury

-- role^player 15:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Roleplayer, News to me! I only came across it when I was adding a redirect for the Buckinghamshire Advertiser so assumed its one and the smae which I've no redirected back as previously. Explains why Trinity Mirror have reinforced the rebranding of the Bucks Examiner to mirrror the Advertiser recently. Thanks Tmol42 (talk) 16:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Do you think it's worth adding a note to both pages about the possible confusion? -- role^player 18:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Added a banner to each article, trust this is what you were thinking of. I see there is also a Buckingham Advertiser just to add to any confusion! Tmol42 (talk) 01:18, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I've amended them slightly to make it less confusing. Let's ignore the Buckingham Advertiser for the time being, and lobby the newspaper companies to come up with some more original names for their papers! -- role^player 10:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thames Valley Police

Hi Tmol42. Just to let you know I've changed the Thames Valley Police article back to the revision where I removed the apostrophes. I cannot see any reason to use apostrophes in the initialisms I changed – they're not possessives, and I don't think the use of an apostrophe in this case aids reading. Either way, the first instance (where "Police Community Support Officer's" was originally used to denote a plural, not a possession) should definitely not be used.

If there's a reason you want to keep the apostrophes in, then please let me know. However, the rest of the article doesn't pluralise with apostrophes (see the #Organisation section, which uses "BCUs", "LPAs", and "NPTs"). Either way – apostrophes or no apostrophes – the article needs to be consistent throughout.

I hope you're OK with this – let me know you're thoughts! Have a good weekend. matt (talk) 11:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm writing a book about Lily Pincus, teh girlfriend of Claire Löwenfeld. I try to find more informations about Claire, espacially I'm interested in the time 1925-1939, when they lived in Potsdam. Can yuo helb me?

friendly regards from Carmen Winter dichterlandschaft@t-online.de —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.232.59.236 (talk) 11:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Natural selection

I noticed that in this edit you reverted my comment at Talk:Natural selection. If that was an error, please revert yourself, otherwise perhaps you would explain here. Thanks. By the way, if not an error, you should know that WP:ROLLBACK is to be used only for edits that satisfy WP:VAND. Johnuniq (talk) 09:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Oops!! My apologies I had not noticed that my fat thumbs had hit the rollback button on my iPAD by mistakeTmol42 (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Tottenham

Hello. I am in the midst of emptying Category:Former Southern Football League clubs, hence the recategorisation of Spurs. "Former" categories are discouraged, and the category was already largely empty compared to the number of former clubs in the main category. Cheers, Number 57 17:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

It would have been helpful to have explained this first in the edit summary having said that I am not aware of the dislike for the categorisation. Suggest you take this up on the discussion page.Tmol42 (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Tmo142, thanks for your comments re the recent edits and reversions. I had indeed read the "discussion" under Nicknames. I am astonished by some of the individual's statements and it does look like he is not on board with the general idea of an encyclopaedia. Wikipedia is written and maintained by the people for the people and, while some of his work is appreciated, forcing his POV on others is not what the articles are for. His request for editors' credentials seems egotistic, but I can match his own credentials in terms of match attendance and singing/chanting, other than my first game was in 1967 and I never felt the need to fight battles with other fans other than in the school playground. I find his astonishing comment, "It doesn't matter what you like to think. It is bitter compared to some rivalries - only Rangers-Celtic is more dangerous," when re-adding "bitter" on 3 September to further support my feelings about his ego, as well as make me wonder what he gets up to that makes supporting Spurs so dangerous. Are there "controls" or limitations that can be applied to editors? I am not in favour of this, since it amounts to censorship, but the ongoing cycle of edits, reversions and debates needs to come to an end. BTW, I call them the Lilywhites when playing in Europe (in the traditional all-white kit). Maybe I'm archaic. And like many Spurs' supporters I'm not Jewish and I seriously do not like the other North London club. Maybe some of us are indeed "bitter"; I just don't think it's appropriate for the article. LenF54 (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Dale Farm

Hi. I've left two messages for you at the Dale Farm talk page now, please contribute before reverting without rationale. a_man_alone (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Dead links, re Rafael van der Vaart

Hello. Noticed you restoring content removed by another editor at Rafael van der Vaart: thanks for doing that. Another time, please would you also restore the dead link. As described at WP:DEADLINK, we're supposed to leave dead links in place in the hope that they can be replaced with an archive copy or alternative source, as I've now done at Mr van der Vaart's page. But if you haven't got enough time or interest to start searching for alternatives, please just tag the offending link with the {{dead link}} template. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 09:53, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Struway2, I confess that when I came across the edit I knew I should retain the link but hide it so attempted to do so but could not find the right wiki markup code to do this. I did have a good look at the citation to see if the page had been moved but a) it was clear it was no longer there as the whole site has been updated and only now has pages relating to the last 2 years, and b) it is actually an unofficial fanzine site from the USA for AJAX and comprises a few blogs. I had a search around and could not find any other reference to the events. So that was my rationale for adding the citation needed tag. Thanks for the link to deadlinks actionsTmol42 (talk) 21:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey, sorry if I sounded pompous... The Van der Vaart page isn't on my watchlist, but the editor who removed the content had come to my attention elsewhere and I'd let them irritate me. I've edited that bit of the article now, to sort out the chronology a bit, added a live online reliable source for the overweight and media criticism - he obviously did an interview in June 2004 where the subject came up, because there were several similar press pieces from the same date - and reword the loss of the captaincy to fit with what the sources, including the player himself, say, i.e. that he refused to play out of position. Not sure how popular my changes will be, because it seems from the rest of the article that the player has no faults at all... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Harry Redknapp

Sorry - I should read things more carefully! Mea Culpa. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at ClaretAsh's talk page.
Message added 13:32, 19 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ClaretAsh 13:32, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

William Ellis School

In connection with our work on the William Ellis School pge, and its ongoing disagreements - may I ask if you are an Old Elysian or connected to the school yourself? I ask only because you are clearly as concerned as I to record both the School Song and, I hope, to retain the full list of alumni. (You also possess a copy of that school history!) If it is in danger of deletion, I am minded to contact the school, and see if such information could be held upon their own website to avoid its disappearance, and would be interested in your view. ExLibre (talk) 09:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Onboarding

I thought about the potential issue re: self promotion in citing Anne Fisher's article in Fortune. The question is whether it's better to stick with a three-year old reference from the Financial Times (which talks about one firm) or change to a more up-to-date reference from Fortune (which talks about another firm). Totally accept my bias since the Fortune article talks about my firm and will go with your unbiased judgment about the tradeoff between being up to date and which firm to promote.Gbradt (talk) 22:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Cottage Bookshop

1. Please don't blank redirects. 2. If you think a redirect should be deleted, send it to WP:RFD. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:22, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Tmol42, thanks for your courteous response in the AfD. I really don't see any need to delete that redirect, since all it does is point a reader to the discussion in the target article. If you haven't seen it before, please take a look at the brief essay Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap. Best, --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Arxilxos, yes I know the ethos on redirects but where a redirect is in essence a flag flying for a commercial entity in this case a shop of no notability what's so ever there is for me a trumping card which says as its no diffeent from adding a spam url for that shop. The redirect was in fact previously an article advertising the shop and the correct action at the time would have been an AfD for the article not the creation of a redirect.Tmol42 (talk) 01:01, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

PS an added irony the editor who created etc the article was eventually blocked fo creating miscevious redirects!!Tmol42 (talk) 01:05, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. When you recently edited Bolter End, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lane End (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) 10:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk page protocol at talk:human capital and talk:individual capital

Hello, thanks for pointing out there were some attribution issues on those pages after my edits. Reverting was not a good solution because there were new links to references others had already cited, that will help improve both articles. Merge comments, also, belong on talk:human capital and must be moved there so the entire debate can be assessed in one place before people add new comments. The two minor copyedits to others comments which were clarifications, were removed as you seemed to object to them. What you seemed to think was editing someone else's comment was me editing my own, sorry for the confusion. The talk comments that were the source of summaries now at talk:individual capital only thank the original contributors now and do not give the impression that they wrote the copyedited text. Of course, feel free to improve those summaries as they are not attributed to anyone in particular, and hopefully both articles will get better.

I believe that all the comments that demonstrated a grasp of the material and knew the actual name of the article (individual capital proposed in the merge) were against the merge. I will leave it up to you to decide if two years is enough time for the merge proposal or if more comment on that should be solicited before the merge tag is removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.192.106.144 (talk) 17:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

You don't seem to understand that how you edited the two talk pages is totally incorrect and misleading to other editors. Moving other editors' contributions from one page to another where a merger is being discussed can only be done in a specifically approved way where a formal discussion has been launched on both pages. For what ever reason this was not done at the start of the discussion so this was not a formal merge proposl and is frankly dead in the water and should be left alone. Therefore no transfer of old contributions to one or other pages need or should be made. Before you make further errors please review Wikipedia Guidelines and Policies on this subject see Help:Merging and the guidance linked to this page.

You have also amended other editors comments either in situ or having moved them. No such editong even if this improves undertanstanding ( in your opinion) should be done. This is the reason for the warning on your Talk Page. Again this is set out in guidelines which I urge you to read Here.

Yes I removed some of your references but frankly sorting the 'wheat from chaff' in the mess you created it was simpler to do this and then for you to add these back in at the bottom under a new heading. I see you have been doing some further changes on the Talk Pages so I will go and look at this. I have tried to cut some slack here as you are an inexperecnced editor but please go and look at how you should edit on Talk Pages before you come to grief.Tmol42 (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring the references. If you want to mark certain contributions as old or suggest they not be counted or put them in a different section than more recent ones, fine, but deleting them entirely seems not appropriate since the individual capital page itself told those interested to edit at talk:human capital not talk:instructional capital. So moving that text seems to simply keep an ongoing discussion in one place.

See talk:human capital for other responses. If the merge is closed, then the status of particular comments is moot, else all of them should be visible, old and new, though if you want to put different section headings on the old vs. new comments that's a reasonable solution to this problem.

I admit to not editing talk pages much. Certain rules at Wikipedia seem to have become much more sticky since the last time I bothered. It used to be that adding links to already-existing Wikipedia articles or claimed authorities, or clarifying a term obvious in context ("the term" versus "the term X"), was considered a courtesy not an infraction, especially for IP users who don't really have a right to be picky as long as the meaning is the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.192.106.144 (talk) 22:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Angelina Jolie

Thank you for pointing that out. I still reserve the right to revert unexplained edits though! -- role^player 20:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm 100% with you on the importance of edit summaries. Particularly where registered users of WP are lazy and fail to do this it annoys the hell out of me. In this case I had previously checked the www and there were plenty of reasonable sources confirming AJ was no longer living in Fulmer.Tmol42 (talk) 20:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Civil parishes in Hertfordshire

Hi, I saw you changed a lot of civil parish names in the list of Hertfordshire civil parishes. I was just wondering where this information came from. –anemoneprojectors– 09:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, I think I've found out. Do you know when these changes happened, and also, have any boundaries changed? –anemoneprojectors– 10:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I think the changes have occurred mainly over at least the last year or two but some seem to have been changed some time ago. In general I suspect they have just not been picked up by anyone doing a comprehensive check of all pariahes. It looks like in one or two cases there were name changes, however in looking at the maps for the area there have also been boundary changes and new parishes created to take account of such things as new housing developments. I also found that the had been some confusion between a village and a hamlet. Although there is no absolutely clear definition to distinguish between them, I applied the principle that a village has or did have a church and was not just part of a larger village settlement. I posted a note on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hertfordshire#Villages and Hamlets.Tmol42 (talk) 12:27, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. The list before you made changes matches up to the Ordnance Survey maps I own, and now I'm kind of looking forward to seeing these changes on new maps! I had read in my local newspaper (I am from Stevenage) that there was going to be some sort of vote over the future of Great Ashby but I hadn't heard that it had actually become a new parish. I did think it was slightly strange that you changed Langley from a village to a hamlet, as it is the main settlement within the parish of Langley. The parish has no church, and the village has no shops or anything other than houses (though used to have a pub) so this probably makes sense. I have a few of the places on my watchlist and I think of the edits I saw, the one to Langley was the only one I might have disagreed with. I find it interesting that Great Ashby has been described as a "neighbourhood" but I don't think anyone would call it a village. It's a bit like the Jersey Farm estate, which I think actually is in the parish of Sandridge, but is a neighbourhood of St Albans. To be honest, I thought Great Ashby would be better merged with Stevenage Borough! Anyway, I'm rambling :-) You said something about maps - are these maps you've seen online? –anemoneprojectors– 13:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

List of places in Buckinghamshire

Are we including places in Milton Keynes now? I don't have a problem with it, where are we drawing the line? Are we including the MK estates? -- role^player 21:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I have not broken any new ground here. The List of Places..... relates to the ceremonial county of Bucks and already contains all the other places in Milton Keynes UA already captured by the Categories for villages or hamlets in Buckinghamshire. The places I added were the only three that were missing from the list. So I am not guilty of 'list creep'. Just done the same for the Lists for Herfordshire and Oxfordshire places which were very incomplete by comparisonTmol42 (talk) 22:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

OK np -- role^player 18:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of St Michael, Hertfordshire

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on St Michael, Hertfordshire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. OrenBochman (talk) 06:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of St Michael, Hertfordshire

The article St Michael, Hertfordshire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is an unsourced article. Rather than removing the unsourced facts per WP:V it should be deleted wholesale inline with lack of WP:N

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. OrenBochman (talk) 10:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Revert

Would you care to explain? this ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Was using IPad at the time so must have hit a rollback with my fat thumb by mistake appologies.Tmol42 (talk) 01:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 01:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

IOR

I noticed you reverted some promotional edits concerning TheIOR on the Recruitment article, like I did earlier. After having taken an even closer look, it seems to me that there is an obvious conflict of interest here, and it would be recommendable that also the article Institute of Recruiters gets deleted from Wikipedia for severe lack of notability. It would be in the editor's own best interest to revert these silly actions to promote his endeavor on Wikipedia, imho. If you agree, could you be so kind to take care of it? Thanks, WeatherFug (talk) 10:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Weatherfug, my suspicions were similarly raised by the obvious promotional nature of the edits on the Recruitment and HR articles but I had not seen anything specific which amounted to reasonable enough evidence of a conflict to put a WP:COI tag on the IOR page. If you have happy I will join with you to progress as you propose.Tmol42 (talk) 12:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, concerning WP:CO, take a look at Institute of Recruiters Revision history. Vast majority of the editing was done by user:Azmatmohammed and by user with IP 78.144.147.196. It looks like they are one and the same person. The username is about the same as the IOR founder's name. In itself a conflict of interest doesn't necessarily provide a reason for deletion, but combined with the shown lack of notability it does, I think. The organisation is very young, was apparently started to compete with a far older and more established professional body (that hasn't even its own Wikipedia article). For reference there are only some articles about the startup. Template:Proposed deletion could be used for tagging. Shall I? WeatherFug (talk) 20:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

My first action where I suspect an editor may have a COI is to post a note on their talk page. Having gone and looked again at the edit histories of the IOR page the Recruitment and the Human Resourses I agree the pattern of editing is pretty conclusive. Also see that the user name is the same as the principle person at the IOD but need to be cautious and not confront/ out a User. I will post a polite note on user page andwould propose we allow a bit of time for a reply before tagging the IOR page. Tmol42 (talk) 22:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Please do. I'll gladly leave the matter in your able hands. WeatherFug (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• Regarding the IOR COI discussion you mentioned on my talk page,[2] COIN didn't hold that Azmatmohammed had a COI (actually, there was no holding for that discussion). You can ask User:OlYeller21 (another COIN regular) for his opinion if you want a second opinion on the matter. As for the WP:IMPERSONATE issue, you can post at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention to see whether any action is needed. However, at some point WP:AFG kicks in and if the evidence isn't sufficient to establish something, then WP:AFG would have you not continue to confront Azmatmohammed with suspicions. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

First ever Reading Wiki Meetup

You are invited to the first ever Reading Wiki Meetup which will take place at Copa, 76-78 Kings Road, Reading, RG1 3BJ on Sunday 23 September 2012 from 1.00 pm.

I hope as many people as possible will be able to attend so that we can make this a regular event. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Berkshire related topics. Bring your laptop if you like and use the free Wifi or just bring yourself. Even better, bring a friend! Click the link for full details. Looking forward to seeing you. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Recruitment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hiring (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) 04:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Balstock

Hi Tmol42 Thank you for the explanation as to why my Balstock entry was taken down. I now think I understand the issue. Were I to resubmit something like the following, would it be considered acceptable? I could also include a photograph of a previous years event

Balstock Music festival (with link to Balstock site) The Balstock Festival is now in its seventh year having grown from a small event held in one pub, to a three day event featuring more than 100 bands held in a number of venues across the town. It is now Hertfordshires biggest free music festival with all proceeds going to a nominated charity. In 2011, that charity was the restoration of the town's 13th century St Marys church tower.

yint — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yintsinme (talk • contribs) 15:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Your Credo Reference account is approved

Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference.

• Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent.
• If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
• Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences
• Show off your Credo access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Credo_userbox}} on your userpage
• If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 17:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of trade unions, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SURGE and TSSA (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) 11:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited River Chess, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bullhead, Grayling and Water vole (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) 12:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Rose hip, an article and disambiguation

Hi ! We have

• šipak (rose hip), a disambiguation
• šipak (plod), an article.

Se IW links --78.2.108.53 (talk) 08:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Your Credo account access has been sent to your email!

All editors who were approved for a Credo account and filled out the survey giving their username and email address were emailed Credo account access information. Please check your email.

• If you didn't receive an email, or didn't fill out the survey, please email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com
• If you tried out Credo and no longer want access, email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com

If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. I hope you enjoy your account! User:Ocaasi 15:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eddleston, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polish (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) 09:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Connormah's talk page.
Message added 22:20, 8 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

– Connormah (talk) 22:20, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Career development/rewrite

Just a heads up. We don't have subpages for mainspace articles. The attempt to create a workspace, merely created a separate article with a slash in the name. Rather than create a second article, simply create a subpage for the talk page. See WP:Subpages for more information. Hope this helps. Cindy(talk to me) 21:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Career development/rewrite

Career development/rewrite, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Career development/rewrite and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Career development/rewrite during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Tmol42 (talk) 21:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Talk:Talk/Career development/draft

Talk:Talk/Career development/draft, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Talk/Career development/draft and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Talk/Career development/draft during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Tmol42 (talk) 22:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Talk/Career development/draft

If you're the only author of a page and you want it to be deleted, you can just tag it with {{db-author}} and an admin will come and delete it. You don't have to send it to MfD. Hut 8.5 22:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• @Tmol42: go ahead and blank Talk/Career development/draft or add the {{db-author}} as stated by Hut 8.5 above. In essence, the talk page for the original Career development/rewrite article simply needed to be deleted in order to "move" (rather than redirect) the article to the appropriate space. This is why the talkpage had the G6 CSD tag placed on it. When the talk page was deleted, the administrator would have followed the deletion with the move. Sorry it's been so confusing. Cindy(talk to me) 22:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• • You're supposed to remove the "tl|" bit from the code - tag it with the thing that appears on the normal viewing screen rather than the edit window. (I've deleted the page for you.) Hut 8.5 22:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hawridge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norman (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) 11:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

For the "love" of Matt Baker

Please can you write/edit or modify Matt Bakers page to include his involvement in the 2012 Children in need campaign or find this in good will and let it be stated that you are objecting however not contributing to the edit.TicktonMN (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Though I am a little confused by your statement, it seems you have eventually self censured / moderated your edits to a more appropriate single sentence which is broadly factual, (all be it uncited) and except for attributing the £19m to him when it was one particular activity he commentated on / did a few turns on the tricycle cf last year when his effort accomplished the challenge on his own.Tmol42 (talk) 22:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't agree with you, my statement is not confusing. Please could you write an article on Matt baker's activity in raising as referenced 1.9 million pounds for children in need/ or allow an admission to be put forward. TicktonMN (talk) 11:12, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited White British, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lowland Scots (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) 12:52, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Leavesden, Hertfordshire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Victorian, Three Rivers, Hundred, M25, Hatfield and Rolls Royce

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Weedon, Buckinghamshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Buckingham Park (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) 00:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Old Woughton

Good work on this, I hadn't spotted that the new parish had yet formally come into existence, so you get first shot at setting it up. You've been around here long enough to do so with confidence, but let me know if you need any tips. Walton, Milton Keynes is a good model. Don't forget to add the new parish name|link to template:Milton Keynes parishes. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Population of MK (within original designated area plus Prescott's extensions)

Hi, I notice that you managed to hack your way through the ONS data to get the 2011 population for some parishes around MK, but we don't have a composite figure for MK itself (especially since I removed the figure with the silly source). Can you do that? Or tell me how you got the parish data? Have they still got Urban Area figures? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

There is no published census 2011 figure for the Milton Keynes Urban Area published as yet, As it would not be appropriate to synthesise one from its constituent parishes and wards the best I can do is the latest ONS figure which is a Mid-2010 estimate of 198,771 sourced from the ons table here. I will add this now. PS. What were the Prescott extensions? Tmol42 (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Demography of Scotland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gretna

Old Woughton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Allotment

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Black British, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sunderland, Salford and Sefton (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) 11:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk: Objections to evolution

Hello Tmol42. I was wondering why you reverted my comment on Talk:Objections to evolution? Thanks! Scientific29 (talk) 09:03, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Scientific29, My apologies it must have been my fat thumb brushing the rollback button while using my IPad! Cheers Tmol42 (talk) 16:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; happy editing! Scientific29 (talk) 18:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barrows (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) 17:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hemel Hempstead, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Genesis and Quintessence (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) 12:27, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at Schwede66's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Not sure whether you have watchlisted my talk page, but there's another message for you. Schwede66 17:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Fitzjohn's Primary School

The article Fitzjohn's Primary School has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Primary schools are not typically notable.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ^King Jakob _C2 22:16, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Fitzjohn's Primary School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fitzjohn's Primary School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fitzjohn's Primary School until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.^King Jakob _C2 17:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Weedon Hill

Hi, I went to add merge tags to Weedon Hill and Berryfields, but notice that you have added a speedy delete tag to Buckingham Park, Buckinghamshire to facilitate a move of Weedon Hill. Is your plan to then merge the Berryfields content in with that article? - Scribble Monkey (talk) 17:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I was heading in that direction. I was just checking if Berryfields was effectively part of the Buckingham Park settlement or had an emerging separate identity. Meantiime was sorting out the Weedon Hill end of things. As I could not find much about Berryfields apart from estate agents blurb, I agree a merger of all three under Buckingham Park seems the way forward.Tmol42 (talk) 17:55, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Seems like a sensible idea to me. Berryfields can always be resurrected as a separate article if necessary later on. - Scribble Monkey (talk) 21:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Bradford Factor

D6equj5 (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Tmol42 - you repeatedly revert my edits - you are vandalising my corrections to the Bradford Factor entry - please halt immediately. Thank you D

As what you have repeatedly added is incorrect and there are no sources which support your contention I will reserve the right to edit or revert it. I have encouraged you to discuss on the article Talk Page where i have added a new section but so far you have ignored this and not done so. Your accusation that my and other editors' edits amounts to vandalism is considered inappropriate, rude and is uncivil, i will,cut you some slack as you appear to be a new editor but please read WP:UNCIVIL and also please in future sign you postings with 4~s. Tmol42 (talk) 19:39, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

United Kingdom labour law

Hi Tmol42. Just to make you aware I have put a page move request up on the United Kingdom labour law talk page so that we can get a consensus and action it at the same time. Feel free to add your opinion (again!) regarding this. Thanks, iComputerSaysNo 08:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Golden Sands

I'll have to assume your restoration of spammed, promotional links was a mistake. If I'm wrong, do start a discussion on the talk page explaining how they could be appropriate external links. --Ronz (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Apologies, must have been my Ipad thumb wandering onto the rollback button.Tmol42 (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem. I was hitting "Thank" all the time by accident until they added the confirmation. --Ronz (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

UK labour law

Hello Tmol42, could you please voice your support for moving the page back to the proper name, at Talk:United Kingdom employment law? Wikidea 15:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Paulinho

Why did you revert my edit? The article itself confirms (with a reliable source) that he left Corinthians for Totterham. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 14:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The established convention at WP for football moves is to wait for the receiving club to announce this. in THFC case this is via their website / press release etc. Prior to this newspapers are reporting based on speculation of verbal comments however well-informed. Be patient.Tmol42 (talk) 15:28, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Foreign-born population of the United Kingdom may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
• of-birth-and-nationality.xls Population by Country of birth and Nationality July 2010 to June 2011], Retrieved 31 July 2013</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to White British may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Census]]. As a result of the 2011 census the estimated White British population was 51,745,135 (81.9% of the UK total population.<ref name="CensusEngland"/><ref name="CensusScotland"/> (NB. This

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

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

Read the full newsletter

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 20:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at User talk:The Rambling Man, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ...William 19:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:52, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Milton Keynes

Why did you not feel it necessary to give a reason for reverting my edit? Wicks Steve (talk) 03:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Check it out and you will see the formatting is screwed up so no need for a reason, and in any case we do not put flags of countries on settlement articles.Tmol42 (talk) 16:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

So only American towns and cities are permitted to use flags on settlement articles?
Menlo Park, California, Chicago, Boston...

WP:INFOBOXFLAG
Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes...
Wicks Steve (talk) 06:03, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

″The lady doth protest too much, methinks″ ......which drew me on to see the advice you have been proffered on your talk page and having seen your recent edits and self reverts I strongly urge you cease bothering me again with your futile use of selected fragments of guidance. Tmol42 (talk) 12:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you stop being so arrogant and learn to accept when you are wrong. Wicks Steve (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

You're breaking the formatting on the infoboxes Steve, that is why Tmol42 was reverting. You're incorrect here. Please preview your edits and see the breaking of the boxes. Canterbury Tail talk 03:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

The passage I quoted makes no mention of the "infobox UK place template" being an exception to the rule. Wicks Steve (talk) 04:35, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Assuming Good Faith here that making a final effort with some more clarification might bring all this to a swift end. WP:INFOBOXFLAG from which you quoted links to the MoS icons section headed "Avoid flag icons in infoboxes". This heading shouts loud and clear what is the norm and sets the tone of the section content which follows. When read in full, rather than selectively, it makes clear that the use of flags is generally discouraged for all the reasons it sets out. Whilst it may be used in government administrative articles this is only where there is editorial concensus. Given that you would have found that flags are absent from the vast majority if not all such UK articles it would have been sensible to conclude that the concensus of editors of such UK articles was to follow this guidance and not use flags - adding and then re-adding flags wholesale was just going to raise hackles. I think you have already had this pointed out to you elsewhere by some experienced editors so its probably both wise and community-orientated to take their advice on board and move on.Tmol42 (talk) 01:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Étienne Capoue‎

FYI, I attempted to discuss the matter on the other editor's talk page and at BLPN. He has not responded meaningfully to either. GiantSnowman 13:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

@ Tmol42: next time you have a message for me, please address it to my talk page and not another, so that I can be better acquainted with it. --Ebdòmero (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Thank you for your kind words. --evrik (talk) 16:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Grammar schools debate may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• about the number of places in girls and boys schools. In practice, such as in the example of [[Medway Council], where there were broadly equal numbers of places available for boys and girls,

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beyond 2011, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LSE (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) 08:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 2 Desborough.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 1 Aylesbury.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 5 Burnham.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 3 Ashendon.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 4 Cottesloe.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 6 Stoke.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckland Common Buckinghamshire.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 8 Newport.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Buckinghamshire hundreds 7 Buckingham.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:29, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Chesham Library.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Chesham St Marys Church 2.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:20, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Chesham War Memorial.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:22, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Chesham Eligva Theatre.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:25, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Chesham Town Hall.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Chesham Town Crest 01.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Cholesbury jeston window.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:33, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Cholesbury st lawrence1.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Paulinho (footballer) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Maciel Júnior''', commonly known as '''Paulinho''', ({{IPA-pt|pawˈlĩj̃u|br}}); born 25 July 1988) is a Brazilian footballer who plays as a [[midfielder]] for [[Tottenham Hotspur F.C.|Tottenham

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:49, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Census ref

When, in this edit to White British you added the "Census England" ref, it pointed at a table for Wales. Do you know what the correct reference for England is? --David Biddulph (talk) 00:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 6

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 6, April-May 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

• New donations from Oxford University Press and Royal Society (UK)
• TWL does Vegas: American Library Association Annual plans
• TWL welcomes a new coordinator, resources for library students and interns
• New portal on Meta, resources for starting TWL branches, donor call blitzes, Wikipedia Visiting Scholar news, and more

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

White British

Could you take a look at the recent edits to figures by IPs at that article - both in the infobox and in the opening text? They don't seem to me to add up, but I'm having some difficulty in finding the right tables at the ONS site to try and make the corrections. I haven't reverted the recent changes because I'm simply not sure what the correct figures are! Any help gratefully received. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:53, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ghmyrtle. yes it was a bit of a mish-mash following some unclear updating by IP's. I have gone back and found new tables, some published more recently, and added in new data and citations as required including some for NI (which is based on an alternative methodology given the sensitivities there of categorising ethnicity). Hope this is Ok its a bit late so may have missed something!Tmol42 (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - though I'm not sure about whether the NI figures should be included. It's obviously a very politically sensitive issue. In my view it may be better to exclude those figures, and just include England, Scotland and Wales - with an explanation. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library: New Account Coordinators Needed

Hi Books & Bytes recipients: The Wikipedia Library has been expanding rapidly and we need some help! We currently have 10 signups for free account access open and several more in the works... In order to help with those signups, distribute access codes, and manage accounts we'll need 2-3 more Account Coordinators.

It takes about an hour to get up and running and then only takes a couple hours per week, flexible depending upon your schedule and routine. If you're interested in helping out, please drop a note in the next week at my talk page or shoot me an email at: jorlowitzgmail.com. Thanks and cheers, Jake Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

English Demography

Hi, I saw the great work that you had done with Demographics_of_England in the organisation of its tables and I was wondering whether they might be able to be extended to give information on Population density.

What I would do is then add a note to say:

Population density based on a calculated 130,427 km² area of the United Kingdom.

But my problem is that I don't have the technical skill to do this my self. Its just an idea but I think an adaptation like this would make the information even more meaningful.

Regards, Gregkaye (talk) 12:51, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Matt Baker (presenter), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ellie Harrison (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) 08:57, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. players may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {| class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align: center;"
• |align"left"|{{sortname|Gylfi|Sigurss

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 7

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 7, June-July 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• Seven new donations, two expanded partnerships
• TWL's Final Report up, read the summary
• Adventures in Las Vegas, WikiConference USA, and updates from TWL coordinators
• Spotlight: Blog post on BNA's impact on one editor's research

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of poor law unions in England may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• (1899–1930),Chenies, Chesham, Chesham Bois, Coleshill, Great Missenden, Latimer (1899–1930), Lee (1838–1930, Little Missenden (1901-1930), Penn, Seer Green.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:50, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chiltern Hills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Well. 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) 09:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bicester may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• C. ''History of the Present Deanery of Bicester, Oxon.'' 2 vols. Oxford: Parker & Co, 1882-94)</ref> In 1910 the [[Great Western Railway]] built the [[Chiltern Main Line#The Bicester cut-off|
• at the Garth.<ref>[http://bicesterbowlsclub.synthasite.com/History.php Bicester Bowls Club website]], Accessed 5 September 2014</ref> There are two 18-hole [[golf course]]s at the Bicester Hotel and

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:23, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Midshires Way may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Dalby]].<ref>[http://www.leics.gov.uk/midshires_way Midshires Way Leicestershite County Council]], Accessed 15 September 2014</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Midshires Way may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Dalby]].<ref>[http://www.leics.gov.uk/midshires_way Midshires Way Leicestershite County Council]], Accessed 15 September 2014</ref>
• countrysidewalks/midshiresway Midshires Way Stockport Council], Accessed 15 September 2014]</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Midshires Way, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Winslow, Sawley and Duffield. 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) 09:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 8

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 8, August-September2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• TWL now a Wikimedia Foundation program, moves on from grant status
• Four new donations, including large DeGruyter parntership, pilot with Elsevier
• New TWL coordinators, Wikimania news, new library platform discussions, Wiki Loves Libraries update, and more
• Spotlight: "Traveling Through History" - an editor talks about his experiences with a TWL newspaper archive, Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (November 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • English signup
  • Deutsch signup
• Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
• Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
• British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
• Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
• Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
• JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

White people

Please explain how what I wrote is less neutral than what was there before. – Smyth\^talk 20:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Please respond. – Smyth\^talk 12:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library - ScotlandsPeople - You've got mail

Hello, Tmol42. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.—  Philg88 ^♦talk 10:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (December 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• Elsevier - science and medicine journals and books
• Royal Society of Chemistry - chemistry journals
• Pelican Books - ebook monographs
• Public Catalogue Foundation- art books

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Books and Bytes - Issue 9

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more
• New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more
• Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Wikipedia Library and Persian Wikipedia" - a Persian Wikipedia editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of trade unions in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PPU. 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) 09:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

A big thank you

		The Special Barnstar
		For your selfless help with the Edward Bishop article. Schwede66 03:23, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

British Nigerians

Hello Tmol, thank you for your advice the other day. I actually work in the field of computer science and I have tried to look at the issue of data on the Education section of the British Nigerian page as objectively as possible. I assure you I have no political agenda, except for ensuring that the mostly favorable data on the academic achievements of British Nigerian children are represented fully on the British Nigerian page.

While I feel it is unfair to comment on other users directly, it is clear to me that others do not want fair and balanced reporting of data on specific groups for personal reasons (I assure you I am not one of them). The whole point of Wikipedia is to provide an accurate resource for information free of personal bias and I fail to see how using information from the IPPR report for example doesn't do that.

It isn't my idea of a fun evening, writing numerous posts online to ensure that the achievements of another ethnic group are accurately portrayed. But when I see users editing information based on their own personal bias, then I feel compelled to act. I agree that the Education section is in need of improvement along with the majority of the page, but I have been stymied in my efforts to correct it and provide more information.

Also one must never be afraid to report the facts and you as a fellow man of science know that rationality must never be second to dogma or political opinion.

Thanks for your time

Nograviti (talk)Nograviti (talk) 10:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Chiltern Gravel Hill

Sorry, had a feeling that was wrong, but didn't understand why it linked to what was the plantation in Virginia article in the first place. Thanks for fixing. Famartin (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Somalis in the United Kingdom education discussion

Hi. I see you've contributed to a discussion regarding education statistics at Talk:British Nigerian. Would you be interested in taking a look at a similar one at Talk:Somalis in the United Kingdom? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Larry, Being a scientist disciplined to ensure statistics and data used to argue a point are robust I find much of the material which passes for evidence in this branch of social sciences is unconvincing. I was drawn to the discussion on British Nigerian education by chance and quickly realised that the current Education section is poorly written and wrought by personal agendas using citations that are redundant or do not substantiate the text. I have spent time looking at the research material on the table but these and maybe the whole field seems splattered with a lack of objectivity. No surprises they are also full of politically driven opinions. The IPPR report stands out as objective but this highly respected think tank/research organisation found it had to caveat data due to a lack of comparable data across local authority areas. Unfortnately this had been ignored or had gone unnoticed and was blindly quoted from media reports which had cherry'picked the results and ignored the detail of the report. I posted a note to one of the editors last night suggesting they take a step back as his posts on the talk page are showing signs of frustration and I suggested it would help if he tried and pick off a particular issue and structure his posts in a more concise way so some progress might be made.

Having just looked at the Somali page I see similar problems have been ongoing there for some considerable time. I think both articles need some good input from editors with an objective grasp of the subject. The material currently being chewed over @British Nigerian at least lacks quality for want of a better word. I don't think I can contribute much to the discussions at this point without kicking off a serious literature search but will try and do some digging and see what I can find. If I can locate some good material I will let you know. Tmol42 (talk) 15:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Tmol42, that would be appreciated. I agree that we need to caveat statistics where necessary. I think that that is generally preferable than ruling out using the data at all, as one other editor seems to be suggesting. Anyway, I agree that what we really need is a greater number of objective voices contributing to the discussion. I've been trying to encourage that by requesting third opinions and posting on relevant noticeboards. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Just a quick update on this. I've found what I think is a better source for GCSE results, and have proposed some text based on it here. Your input would be welcome. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for contributing your thoughts and an alternative wording. I'm trying to assume good faith on the part of Middayexpress, but I find it very hard to understand his current objection, and I am starting to wonder whether there's a deliberate strategy to cause confusion and distract people from reaching consensus. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Tmol42. I'm concerned about developments at this article. A couple of editors with a very close relationship now seem to be collaborating to remove perfectly well sourced material from the article. As a longstanding contributor, do you want to take a look? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Larry, I've taken a look over at the talk page during the weekend. I can see there are dark forces in play. Frankly I do not know enough about this subject nor how to get a grasp on the issues to play a part. I think its pretty clear from the insinuations addressed against other editors that these editors believe they have a right to own the article and believe anyone confronting them must have sinister purposes or prejudices against Somalis. I don't think they are inclined to engage in concensus-building but want to subvert the article content to their way of thinking. When having to deal with editors with this sort of an agenda my inclination is to seek support from an experienced Admin who can intervene to prevent those with a campaign or personal agenda to steamroller changes. My first port of call if I do not know an Admin who might have the skills to support one would be to go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents to see if I could get someone to look in and steer / advise in the disussions.Tmol42 (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I've stopped editing the article for now (see my talk page), but I don't intend to give up as it will simply make it easier for editors with an agenda to get their way. It's a shame there aren't a few more disinterested editors working on the article, as that would help in building consensus (with or without the current editors who believe they own the article). ANI might be the place though, as you suggest. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
• New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
• TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

British Bangladeshi GA reassessment

British Bangladeshi, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Hugo Lloris

Hi Tmol42. Thanks for noticing my erroneous edit on the Hugo Lloris page. I do not know how that happened. I've since done another edit that's correct. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RadicalRedRaccoon (talk • contribs) 10:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi RRR, no problem I checked out your other edits which confirmed your aim was merely housekeeping but in err the hoover was turned up to maximum suck!Tmol42 (talk) 20:50, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers.

Hello, Tmol42,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Unclear why my content is rejected

I worked on creating a section to add to the Job Interview Wiki page for a class project. The section I wrote was on Interview Anxiety. I've submitted several times and never received word back why the content was rejected. I asked a friend to try submitting, and this person received word that the article was written as "advice to the reader" and that the "you" "we" and "advice" content needed to be removed. I removed the "advice-like" content, but the section was removed once again. Is there any way I can get this posted? Or is this content just not applicable to this page? Is there something else I am doing incorrectly? Thank you. Lrl20092015 (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, This article appears to have been the subject of several classroom projects over the past few weeks. Perhaps these are all associated with your class project. The net effect if the content was allowed to stand would be an overlong dense and partly non-encyclopaedically worded article which is why several editors have stepped in to delete content. There are two main issues first the level and quantum of content. This is not necessarily a matter of the validity of what is said but for an article on a subject such as job interview the style guide for such articles sets out that readers require a balanced article which covers the breadth of issues and range of relevant topics without overwhelming the reader with excessive detail. 'Interview anxiety' could be described as one of many so called 'fringe issues' which may require brief and cited mention but nothing more. The second issue is style. Just removing the words like 'we' etc and tweaking the odd phrase does not solve this problem. Bear in mind Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia so content needs to be precise and succinct. For this reason large chunks of content on topics for which undue weight has been given, typically if just pasted in without discussion on the Talk page will mre often than not be summarily deleted.Tmol42 (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

PS Having taken the trouble to reply I find you have now deleted your posting. I have reinserted your posting. As a matter of etiquette this does not go down well with editors. I also see you have added text in without at least waiting for a reply. As a newby I will leave this here but another time it would not be allowed to passTmol42 (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

PPS I see having removed the above message I see you have added a revised section of the article. I have now re edited the article to integrate the essence of your essay incorporating it elsewhere in the article.Tmol42 (talk) 18:29, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to reply to my question. I apologize for my ignorance related to the etiquette of posting to Wikipedia and for conversing with editors; I certainly did not intentionally mean to offend anyone. Thank you for revising and finding space for this subject. Lrl20092015 (talk) 19:51, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic groups in London revert

Hi Tmol42. I saw that you reverted an edit to Ethnic groups in London. I almost made the same revert myself, assuming it was to do with the rounding, but when I checked the source, it looks like the IP was actually correcting it correctly - if that makes sense! Cordless Larry (talk) 17:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 11

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - MIT Press Journals, Sage Stats, Hein Online and more
• New TWL coordinators, conference news, and new reference projects
• Spotlight: Two metadata librarians talk about how library professionals can work with Wikipedia

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Work Foundation site

Hi I'm trying to update & refresh the entry to reflect that The Work Foundation has appointed a new Director this month. There are also a number of factual inaccuracies about the work it does and the history of its insolvency. You might regard these as controversial, I just regard them as demonstrably inaccurate. It should be borne in mind that Will Hutton stepped down from the CEO role in 2008 yet the entry (in my view) focuses largely on him and his role. I'd appreciate guidance about how to make these changes in an objective way. I certainly don't want to re-write history (I'm happy, for example, to keep in references to the insolvency) but I would say that the explanation for the insolvency is unbalanced, contains factual inaccuracies and could be regarded as having an 'agenda' against Mr Hutton by implying that the 'decline' of the organisation was wholly attributable to him. My overall aim is to bring the entry up to date and to emphasise The Work Foundation's current research interests, priorities and Director. I am still employed by The Work Foundation and was a Director during the acquisition. Happy to discuss how we resolve this. SteveBevan (talk) 15:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)SteveBevan

Hi Steve, The correct approach is set out on the guidance page you can find here WP:COI As suggested there you could then go to the article talk page and explain who you are and provide citations / sources to enable concerns you have about the current content to be reviewed by others who can then draft seek concensus if adding revising or subtracting material is contraversial and then draft/add content. Providing verifiable sources is vital as rgardless of your knowledge in depth of the situation independant sources are essential. The guidance suggests further approaches that can be followed if you need to get other editors involved. Hope this helps. Tmol42 (talk) 15:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much - really helpful. I'll take a look and then propose some new text & citations. Out of interest, am I allowed to challenge assertions made in the current entry which are, themselves, unsupported by citations & sources?

SteveBevan (talk) 10:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC)SteveBeva

If assertions that are contraversial or about living individuals you could list these. If uncited and incorrect they should be removed by an independant editor or if factual but not supportd by a reference then a 'citation needed' tag can be added. Often its a matter of degree so if there is a Reliable source or sources (see this guidance) independant of the person or organisation a link to that is handy. Bear in mind that most issues have at least two sides and degrees of interpretations so what may be missing is the alternate view ("On the other hand...") to provide balance. All the more obvious with a politically astute journalist and commentator like Will Hutton! So in this case what the Guardian says might not always provide this balance. However, untruths or misleading comment should be removed/ corrected. the COI guidance and related articles goes into all this and how to deal with it. Bear in mind the Work Foundation article is not exactly mainstream or heavily patrolled so you will need to be patient to allow editors to visit and respond. Might be worth introducing yourself there explain you understand the protocol and say you can supply a longer list but propose starting with just the fewer key ones on which you would appreciate help. I will keep and eye but hold back to start with and hope others come forward as 2 or 3 editors is better than just 1.Tmol42 (talk) 15:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Buckinghamshire

Are you still actively involved in the Project? I'm looking to improve on the articles in relation to Aylesbury and surrounding areas. Cheers. Uamaol (talk) 21:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes. I have most if not all Bucks articles on my watchlist and though I have less time these days if you have some specific targets and in relation to these, topics in need of improvement, I am willing to help if I can.Tmol42 (talk) 10:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift reply. My particular targets are Aylesbury town, its suburbs & places of interest, as well as some of the settlements and points on interest within a 5 mile radius. I've made a start on the suburban areas/ neighbourhoods, supplying them with available images from the Commons and adding references where required. Some of them lack important sections, but I'm not really sure where to start or what to look for. I believe it was User:roleplayer that previously assumed the responsibility of the area, but their last global contrib was almost 3 years ago. Do you have idea idea who the reviewer is? Uamaol (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Somalis in the United Kingdom

Hi Tmol42 . As a former contributor to the Somalis in the United Kingdom article, I wanted to let you know about a discussion I started about getting the article to GA status, following the issuing of a topic ban to Middayexpress for POV editing of this and other articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

• Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
• Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
• Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
• Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.

Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
• Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
• Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
• American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Gateway Protection Programme FAC

Hi. As someone who has shown some interest in articles about immigration to the UK, I wondered if you might like to comment on the FAC discussion for Gateway Protection Programme? A previous discussion was archived due to a lack of participation, and I am keen to avoid the same happening again. Any thoughts you have on the article would be much appreciated. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Chesham Town Crest 01.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Chesham Town Crest 01.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. Kelly ^hi! 22:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tmol42. You have new messages at WP:MCQ.
Message added 23:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ww2censor (talk) 23:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
• Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
• Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
• Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
• Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Read the full newsletter

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 15

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 15, December-January 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Ships, medical resources, plus Arabic and Farsi resources
• #1lib1ref campaign summary and highlights
• New branches and coordinators

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 16

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

• New donations - science, humanities, and video resources
• Using hashtags in edit summaries - a great way to track a project
• A new cite archive template, a new coordinator, plus conference and Visiting Scholar updates
• Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 17

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 17, April-May 2016
by The Interior, Ocaasi, UY Scuti, Sadads, and Nikkimaria

• New donations this month - a German-language legal resource
• Wikipedia referals to academic citations - news from CrossRef and WikiCite2016
• New library stats, WikiCon news, a bot to reveal Open Access versions of citations, and more!

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:H&C School Logo copy.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:H&C School Logo copy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 18

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 18, June–July 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi, Samwalton9, UY Scuti, and Sadads

• New donations - Edinburgh University Press, American Psychological Association, Nomos (a German-language database), and more!
• Spotlight: GLAM and Wikidata
• TWL attends and presents at International Federation of Library Associations conference, meets with Association of Research Libraries
• OCLC wins grant to train librarians on Wikimedia contribution

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 19

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 19, September–October 2016
by Nikkimaria, Sadads and UY Scuti

• New and expanded donations - Foreign Affairs, Open Edition, and many more
• New Library Card Platform and Conference news
• Spotlight: Fixing one million broken links

Read the full newsletter

19:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 20

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 20, November-December 2016
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs)

• Partner resource expansions
• New search tool for finding TWL resources
• #1lib1ref 2017
• Wikidata Visiting Scholar

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 21

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• #1lib1ref 2017
• Wikipedia Library User Group
• Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
• Spotlight: Library Card Platform

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

• New and expanded research accounts
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 23

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017

• Library card
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
• Bytes in brief

Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 24

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 24, August-September 2017

• User Group update
• Global branches update
  • Star Coordinator Award - last quarter's star coordinator: User:Csisc
• Wikimania Birds of a Feather session roundup
• Spotlight: Wiki Loves Archives
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Kiswahili and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Tmol42. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 25

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017

• OAWiki & #1Lib1Ref
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: Research libraries and Wikimedia
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 26

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
• Bytes in brief

Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 27

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• New collections
  • Alexander Street (expansion)
  • Cambridge University Press (expansion)
• User Group
• Global branches update
  • Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
• Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 28

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

• #1Bib1Ref
• New partners
  • Rock's Backpages
  • Invaluable
  • Termsoup
• User Group update
• Global branches update
  • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
• Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 29

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018

• New partners
  • Economic & Political Weekly–10 accounts
• Wikimania
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 30

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018

• Library Card translation
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Tmol42. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 31

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018

• OAWiki
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 32

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• New and expanded partners
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 33

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes Issue 34, May – June 2019

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019

• Partnerships
• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 35, July – August 2019

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019

• Wikimania
• We're building something great, but..
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• A Wikibrarian's story
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 36

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019

• #1Lib1Ref January 2020
• #1Lib1Ref 2019 stories and learnings

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 37

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 37, November – December 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Issue 38, January – April 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

• New partnership
• Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

• Library Card Platform
• New partnerships
  • ProQuest
  • Springer Nature
  • BioOne
  • CEEOL
  • IWA Publishing
  • ICE Publishing
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 40

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 40

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 41

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

• New partnership: Taxmann
• WikiCite
• 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020

• New EBSCO collections now available
• 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
• Library Card input requested
• Libraries love Wikimedia, too!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

• New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
• 1Lib1Ref
• Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 43

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021

• New Library Card designs
• 1Lib1Ref May

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 45

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021

• Library design improvements continue
• New partnerships
• 1Lib1Ref update

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 46

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021

• Library design improvements deployed
• New collections available in English and German
• Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 47

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021

• On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
• Search tool deployed
• New My Library design improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:59, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 48

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021

• 1Lib1Ref 2022
• Wikipedia Library notifications deployed

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 49

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022

• New library collections
• Blog post published detailing technical improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 50

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 50, March – April 2022

• New library partner - SPIE
• 1Lib1Ref May 2022 underway

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC) (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 51

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 51, May – June 2022

• New library partners
  • SAGE Journals
  • Elsevier ScienceDirect
  • University of Chicago Press
  • Information Processing Society of Japan
• Feedback requested on this newsletter
• 1Lib1Ref May 2022

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 52

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 52, July – August 2022

• New instant-access collections:
  • SpringerLink and Springer Nature
  • Project MUSE
  • Taylor & Francis
  • ASHA
  • Loeb
• Feedback requested on this newsletter

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 53

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 53, September – October 2022

• New collections:
  • Edward Elgar
  • E-Yearbook
  • Corriere della Serra
  • Wikilala
• Collections moved to Library Bundle:
  • Ancestry
• New feature: Outage notification
• Spotlight: Collections indexed in EDS

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 54

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022

• New collections:
  • British Newspaper Archive
  • Findmypast
  • University of Michigan Press
  • ACLS
  • Duke University Press
• 1Lib1Ref 2023
• Spotlight: EDS Refine Results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 55

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023

• New bundle partners:
  • Newspapers.com
  • Fold3
• 1Lib1Ref January report
• Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 56

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023

• New partner:
  • Perlego
• Library access tips and tricks
• Spotlight: EveryBookItsReader

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

• Suggestion improvements
• Favorite collections tips
• Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 58

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023

• New partners - De Standaard and Duncker & Humblot
• Tech tip: Filters
• Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 59

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023

• Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
• Tech tip: Library access methods

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 60

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 60, November – December 2023

• Three new partners
• Google Scholar integration
• How to track partner suggestions

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 61

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024

• Bristol University Press and British Online Archives now available
• 1Lib1Ref results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)