User talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2014/April

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indigo Revolt

Dear Charles,

Thanks for your comment, I have added the reference to the article that i edited, please check and let me know if still it is not fullfilling the prerequisite.

ThanksMahendra Joshi (Kota) (talk) 10:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

RAF Regiment article edits

Why did you remove the gallery there? What is wrong with having one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreddmoto (talk • contribs) 16:16, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

If you read WP:Image use policy you will see that galleries should only be used for certain specified purposes such as showing a multi-stage process. We have Commons for general galleries. Too many images make pages slow to load on slower internet connections.--Charles (talk) 18:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

That's informative. Thanks. Dreddmoto (talk) 11:51, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

PETERSFIELD

Hello Charles Thanks for the keeping of Wiki clean from advertising features regarding the Festival info I put up in the Petersfield section. How do I get the information accepted to be part of Petersfield information without it sounded like advertising? Hampshire Farmers' market information is on there as it is a regular feature of Petersfield life just as the Festivals. In fact, the Festivals regularly attract and entertain many more thousands of people in the town and surrounding area and all for free. Please explain how I can get this factual information added. Thanks Steve

You need to find third party coverage such as local newspaper articles.--Charles (talk) 17:58, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Gloucester Cathedral

Hi Charles. I don't understand why you removed the entries I had added to Gloucester Cathedral for the various lay people who play an integral part in its ministry. The Chapter Clerk (Steward) is the senior lay administrator ensuring the smooth running of this substantial organisation, the Director of Music plays a key part in leading its worship every day, and the lay members of Chapter are an equal part of the governance of the Cathedral along with the clergy (See the Cathedrals' Measure which created these posts.) So these key lay people are as much part of the operations and governance of the cathedral as are the clergy. If one has the clergy in then one needs these lay people too. For these reasons I've put the addition back into the Infobox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dde0apb (talk • contribs) 09:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

By all means include it in the body of the article if it is referenced to reliable sources but infoboxes are intended to be kept brief and only include the most salient facts about a subject. Otherwise the creep further and further down the page taking up space that could be used for useful images. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Purpose of an infobox and note the sentence "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance."--Charles (talk) 10:30, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
You may also find Wells Cathedral a useful comparison as it has recently been promoted to Featured article, the highest category.--Charles (talk) 10:52, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Wells might be a useful Wikipedia comparison, but it doesn't make it right! Isn't it very odd to have two thirds of those who bear fiduciary and management responsibility of the cathedral on its Wikipedia page and not the other third? Aside from the fact that some are ordained and some are not, I don't see the justification. There would, I suppose be a rationale for removing all the clergy except the three who are full time at the Cathedral, but I am not sure that would be an improvement either, although it would be intellectually consistent at least.dde0apb 12:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Given the intense scrutiny that articles go through to achieve featured status we can safely assume that they follow Wikipedian consensus. That counts for a lot more than your opinion.--Charles (talk) 13:17, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I think that last sentence unnecessarily rude. But maybe I take it too personally. The thing is my opinion is based on being a member of a cathedral chapter, someone who's read the Cathedrals Measure from start to finish and someone who is on the board of the national representative body for English Cathedrals. Personally, I think the key personnel who work at an organisation are worthy of putting in an info box. But I'll not go to the stake over that one. However the posts you have left in the info box are inconsistent. The 3 core cathedral clergy, paid for by central church funds, through a section 21 grant from the Church Commissioners, are the Dean and the two so-called Commissioners Canons. In the case of Gloucester, these are the Precentor and the Chancellor. V Archdeacon is a diocesan canon who will spend more of her/his working life away from the cathedral than in the cathedral. I cannot see any justification for leaving this post in, while having removed one of the Commissioners Canons. --Adrian

If you are a member of the chapter you have a conflict of interest. You are also missing the point that detailed information belongs in the body of the article while info boxes are restricted to a few key facts, generally the less the better. There should not be any information in the lead section that is not already in the body of the article.Wikipedia does not care about your credentials because we only use what is published in reliable sources. We do not allow personal knowledge that is unpublished.--Charles (talk) 09:26, 6 April 2014 (UTC)





Haunted locations

You might want to look at WP:RSN and WP:FTN. Dougweller (talk) 13:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Those threads confirm my gut instinct that this is cruft. Most places have been claimed to be haunted at some point so it would have to be a particularly strong tradition to be notable.--Charles (talk) 17:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Chiddingfold

Please could you look at my remarks on the Chiddingfold talk page, regarding wide image and if you see fit, reply there. I am trying to establish a valid Wikipedia user name at present, but cannot yet sign. I would also like to learn how to watch pages. 217.39.105.81 (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. When you have an account you will see a watch tab at the top of each page. It also takes 4 days and 10 edits for an account to get some functions. I think it would be better if you move the wide image down the page and restore the image in the infobox. That is the standard format for lead sections. How about in the Demography and housing section where there is no image?--Charles (talk) 13:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. Now done as you suggested, except that I have used an image from Wikimedia (not mine) for the Info box which I consider adds more than the previous one to the value of the page. The Panoramic of the green would be much better if it were formatted to be a full width thumb in the central column, which when clicked on, went to a larger scrollable version. Having said that, it is not a great image (it is mine) and not being at the top of the page perhaps does not add enough to justify inclusion. The panoramic of the forge interior (also mine), I consider more valuable, though the same comment about formatting applies. I hope that in due course I come across a page with an image formatted as required, so that I can copy the work.217.39.105.81 (talk) 09:48, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia did have a page I could crib from: Panoramic photography! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.105.81 (talk) 10:30, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Personally I think the previous lead image was more suitable than a large bonfire heap, not because it is mine, but it shows more of the village. I would move the bonfire down left by the text about the bonfire tradition.--Charles (talk) 13:33, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I had not checked whose image I was replacing. I am sorry if I gave offence. In fact I think it best not to check, but on the other hand to state if using one's own image. I think I will leave well alone for a bit. One reason for not reinstating it and using another instead, was that I am hazy about undoing changes. A lesson learnt is to do lots of individual edits, rather than combining several edits of different aspects.

Perhaps you could run your eye over the Elstead page, where I have done quite a bit of editing recently? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.105.81 (talk) 14:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

No offence taken. The images are all public domain now and I do not hold mine as being worth more than others. For the lead image I look for one which best covers a settlement. sometimes that may be a village sign. When I started editing half the villages did not even have a page, so I would take some photos and put together enough info to start an article.
Elstead is not on my watch list so I will go take a look. By the way you can sign your posts by typing four tildes (~).--Charles (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for looking at the Elstead page so promptly. It will take a while to digest what you have done. So many changes as one single edit make it difficult to revert a single change to someone with as little Wiki experience, not that I want so to do, as yet. To show my inexperience it was only today I found the Wikimedia Commons had a home page. I cannot sign as 217.39.105.81 (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2014 (UTC) just comes up with a changeable number each time I connect. I hope the volunteers who process account names find time for mine soon. It is also quite possible that unknowingly they are waiting for a response from me! Many tildes 217.39.105.81 (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Can you not just create a named account? You can compare the old and new versions of a page by clicking on history at the top the page then the compare selected versions button which shows them side by side.--Charles (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
p.s. under Wikipedia's arcane requirements for verifiabity I should question if you have a reliable source for that green being the best known.....but it is too late in the day):--Charles (talk) 21:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

So how should the green be described? If one were to say "The village green" or "Elstead Village Green" it would imply there was only one. There is a smaller second one by the church, and arguably another. Even in Chiddingfold, Highstreet Green might be considered a second green.

More seriously, if I were to create a Wikipedia account it might well be an impediment to merging my Wikimedia Commons account with it, to give a combined account with one username and password. Meanwhile you can get to my talk page on commons via any of my photos. See Commons:Changing username/Current requests for the progress of my request. 217.39.105.81 (talk) 09:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Presumably it can be related to somewhere else in the village but I am not familiar with the layout. Saying it is best known just invites the question "how do we know".--Charles (talk) 20:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

I have now got a user name for Wikipedia so can sign. I think I need to concentrate on learning about uploading, adding and formatting images, as Wiki Loves Monuments was my introduction to Wikimedia. I may not be able to resist a few edits. There seem to be plenty of people listed as "Notable" who are nothing of the kind, but I will steer clear of that for the moment. SovalValtos (talk) 12:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited St Laurence's Church, Ludlow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poppyhead (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) 08:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Spanish Armada

I didn't mean to start a lengthy forum-style discussion at the talk page for the article, I just felt that there was a kind of gap in the article and that my question could help to improve it. The article only states that the Spanish did circumnavigate the British Isles but are somewhat silent as to why, i.e. the rationale for this move which leaves the reader clueless about this point. In the meantime I have found the article Spanish Armada in Ireland which gives some hints that enlightens me about a few aspects about this but on the other hand the details given there also seem to contradict in some aspects what is said in the article Spanish Armada. It says: "Some proposed a course for Norway, others for Ireland. Medina Sidonia made his choice", so there seem to have been at least some voice that actually opted for Norway (although the wording "for Norway" sounds ambiguous as to whether it means the Norwegian waters or the harbours). Still the rationale for the decisions is not given clearly. Later on, the article on the Armada in Ireland states that at least a few ships actually took shelter in Irish harbours and carried out repairs - an information, not included in the main article -, which might have been reason enough for Medina Sidonia to head for Ireland but it is not entirely clear if that was his intention after Gravelines in the first place or if the ships captain's went for the Irish harbours only after they have encountered the devastating storms on the Atlantic. So if someone has any sources that might shed some light on these decision making processes in the Spanish fleet that might very well improve the article and help the reader understand the causes of the events described therein. I understand, though, that the talk page of the article is prone to tedious discussions that won't help to improve the article while at the same time it is always a thin line between legitimate article-improving input and discussion for discussion sake (which was not my intention; I appreciate that you seem to grant me the benefit of good faith). --88.73.6.199 (talk) 18:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The thing is that Wikipedia does not engage in speculation as to what the reasons and motives of historical figures might have been. We will report what reliable sources may have said on the subject if you can find them, provided that they are based on historical information, if it exists. I suspect not much does exist. The Spanish Armada in Ireland article is not well sourced and it is hard to see where the information came from. I would not rely on that article for anything.--Charles (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Adoption Program

The adopt-a-user program was the first thing I saw. I am not even sure how to message other users. I'm guessing it is by making sections on their talk page? You are listed as someone who would like to help people just starting out and I was wondering if you'd be able to teach me how to get started on wikipedia.

Draav (talk) 01:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Draav. You have posted this message in just the right way and even signed it correctly. Not many new editors get that to begin with. I have put an invitation to the Teahouse on your talkpage. You will find most basic questions have already been answered there. If there is anything else you need help with just ask here. You were correct in putting you new section at the bottom here. The Teahouse is the only exception to this general rule as new questions go at the top there. Happy editing.--Charles (talk) 08:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello again Charles. I want to try to expand this article about dragons in literature. I have found more examples of dragons in early children's literature along with some recent series that were not included and wasn't sure how to add them. If I should just copy the style of how it is already written or what. For example I have found another story called The Magic World, by Edith Nesbit which contains dragon characters. Also Robin Hobb has another series which is not mentioned. How would I add books to this list? Should I include summaries similar to the books already mentioned?

Draav (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes copy the way the existing entries are done. When you click the edit button you will see how the formatting is done.--Charles (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Haslemere

Thank you for reverting my error which resulted from my confusion of Grayswood and Grayshott. Perhaps you could also suggest revisions for Branksome Place, in locality Shottermill. The whole passage might be more clearly expressed? Surely Grade 1 is higher than Grade 2* SovalValtos (talk) 21:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Good catch. Grade I is of course higher and very rare. The whole section seems to have grown ad hoc into rather a muddle.--Charles (talk) 08:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I have made quite a few changes already in an attempt to de-muddle it. Another page you might look at is RGS Guildford (the school), which looked like it was composed by an enthusiast. The reason for asking is as a new boy, have my edits been too Bold , or not bold enough? SovalValtos (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I had a quick look at RGS and your edits look just fine. School articles usually attract internal school stuff which is not reliably sourced or of any wider encyclopaedic interest. Chop it out I say.--Charles (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

South West Trains

Hi Charles, I noticed you removed my edits from the South West Trains page but I'm not sure I understand why. I was inspired by some other Wikipedia pages that had similar (if not identical) formats, and personally I find it easier to understand than the current version. For that reason I'd like to put it back in if possible, so if you could tell me what the issues with it are and how I can fix them I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks! Ggrnw27 (talk) 21:40, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Granted I'm a Wikipedia newbie, but in my opinion what I wrote doesn't fall under that category. If I'm wrong, please correct me. I'm only pushing this because several other pages have the same thing (it's where I got the idea from). Greater Anglia, Southeastern, and Southern have identical tables, and First Great Western and London Midland have the same information but in a different format. Ggrnw27 (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
You can make crap like that on Wikia or other websites.--Charles (talk) 08:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2014/April&oldid=1072557877"