Talk:Longnewton

	North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North East EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject North East EnglandTemplate:WikiProject North East EnglandNorth East England articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spelling[edit]

Is Longnewton, or Long Newton the correct name for the village? Maps, Roads and Road Signs seem to contridict each other on the name. -Andrew Duffell 08:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual editing[edit]

This seems a bit odd.

Mbarnes92 edited this article, and no other, between 29/02/12 and 02/04/12.
Most of their contributions appear to be useful. (Looking at them, I feel that this is clearly not a new user.)
This edit appears to be at least wrong, and perhaps silly or disruptive.
Difficult to tell whether they are being deliberately silly (ahem, biting social commentary) or just have a wacky theory about the weather but can't spell "Pennines".
It's a bit embarrassing that this nonsense has been here since 07/03/12 and lots of us have edited it but never noticed this. Ahem. :( Mea culpa etc.
It got noticed and corrected today, thank you, by 86.19.237.161. Assuming good faith and innocent, helpful bystander. :)

Where does this leave us?

If it was just a typo then fine. I think the Pennines weather theory would be no good anyway, but at least a typo is just a typo.
If it was deliberate, either malicious disruption or just a little experiment for their Master's dissertation on "internet sociology and the user-led market", where does it leave us with the credibility of their other edits? This is the one that worries me a little - Mbarnes92 did a lot of work here and I'm not sure how much of it can be checked.

What do you think? I'm tb-ing the involved editors and a couple of other regulars and would be very interested to read your views.

Best wishes to all, DBaK (talk) 10:17, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I got a message about this. I don't recall how I got to the article in the first place, but when I first saw it (after the first five edits by Mbarnes92), it looked like this - notice the world map and two red links in the infobox. My first edit fixed that. I didn't notice that there were two sets of coordinates upper right, overlapping and different; I didn't fix that until this edit - this must have been picked up by looking at my watchlist, because Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags had not been created (or populated) at that point. My third edit was to correct some spellings and link some railway stations, and was definitely noticed through my watchlist. My fourth eliminated some entirely unnecessary newlines before each of ^[13]^[14]^[15]. I made two more fixes, some time after which I unwatched the page. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]