User talk:Arb/Archive 1

Ockbrook and Borrowash
Archived at Talk:Ockbrook_and_Borrowash. -Arb. 17:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Lordship Lane, London
Archived in two parts: -Arb. 10:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) User_talk:MRSC/Archive_3
 * 2) User_talk:MRSC/Archive_4

Hello
I apologize for reverting your edit to the Nicaragua article, i was merely trying to remove vandalism and did not notice. -- LaNicoya  •Talk•   21:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. That was always the most likely explanation.  The edit summary was not so much a complaint as an attempt to ensure that it didn't happen again.  You appear to be doing a good job in trying circumstances on that article. Keep it up. -Arb. 09:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Template
Reply is on my Talk page. Xn4 15:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Moravian Church Foundation
Hi, I believe Moravian Church Foundation should be moved to Moravian Church foundation, please let me know your thoughts bby responding on my talk page.--Kiyarr lls ton 11:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Greetings. "Foundation" is part of their name. That makes it a proper noun (does it not?) and it is the way they always refer to themselves - see http://www.mcfworld.com/?lang=EN and compare Wikimedia Foundation. Regards, -Arb. (talk) 11:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC).


 * Yes indeed. - Does the Moravian Church Foundation have anything to do with Moravians (ethnic group) or the Moravian Church? I think the article should in the first sentence define it as and link to Foundation (nonprofit organization) if that is what it is. I found very little in google news regarding it. Regards, --Kiyarr lls ton 18:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * This is Wikipedia. No one "owns" the article. If you wish to add some words to link to Foundation (nonprofit organization) please go right ahead. Similarly, if you feel the article would be easier to read if it was restructured (eg to bring the church connection to the top) then feel free to do that too. It's always good to have more than one person edit an article - different people see things in different ways. -Arb. (talk) 20:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Remove link (C) Status unclear
To avoid fragmentation, this discussion is all at User_talk:ShakespeareFan00/Sfan00_IMG/Archive_1 -Arb. (talk) 12:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Your Userspace article Kingston to Montigo Bay
As per new policy, please change all wikimapia links to °N, °W s in the form 123.45679°N, 987.65432°W Thank you for your compliance. Yamakiri TC    [ §]  06-16-2008 • 21:15:24


 * Feel free to Ignore above request per the disscussion on User_talk:Sfan00_IMG, Your further input on the matter of geocoding welcomed, For example is the approach taken on the Jamacian churches page acceptable? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Your approach (direct Wikimapia text link followed by °N, °W ) works well in that article with one minor quibble: it would look better if the coords were displayed in a slightly smaller font - as things stand they seem to overpower the accompanying text. Other than that, it appears to satisfy everyone's requirements.  Whether it works for all articles we will have to see but it certainly has promise. -Arb. (talk) 12:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

External links in article body
Hello. As you are well aware, External links does not condone external links in article body outside the External links section, and with links to geographical information services in particular, it instructs to give the information as coordinates only, not links to specific map services. WikiMapia is a great service, but you as an advocate of WikiMapia should try to understand that not everyone shares your enthusiasm about combining Wikipedia with a project that has incompatible goals, stucture, and terms of use. Please stop reverting people. --Para (talk) 20:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Response on hold pending the outcome of ongoing discussions elsewhere. -Arb. (talk) 22:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The current EL discussion on the inappropriateness of external links in article body reminded me of this. The WikiMapia specific discussion seems to have concluded that they can be used in exceptional cases only where other services do not have similar information. Is there something exceptional with the links you have added to articles? --Para (talk) 23:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

B Roads
Hello Arb

I don’t know what you have done with the pages for the B1436 road and the B1156 road, they now revert straight to page B roads in Zone 1. Can you explain to me why?.Stavros1 (talk) 18:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

 stavros1  ♣
 * Have undun the redirections of these pages. Don’t know if you were responsible in the first place, but if you were, some contact would have shown some courtesy rather than a straight re-Direction. *

Greetings User:stavros1.

If you read the history at B1436 and B1156 you will clearly see that the redirects were put in place by User:Saga City and 217.36.107.9.

They appear to be waging a war of attrition against B Road articles in general (including the B1159 road in which I have a particular interest) and have recently succeeded in having deleted Template:GB B road zone 1.

-Arb. (talk) 19:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I may be maligning User:Saga City. You seem to have recently moved these two roads from "road" to "Road" but your message to me linked "road". Having twigged this, B1436 Road (capital R) appears to have been redirected by 217.36.107.9 - check its history. B1436 road (small r) is still redirected to B roads in Zone 1 of the Great Britain numbering scheme btw. -Arb. (talk) 20:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You are! In my view every A and B road should be included - I am setting up redirects where I see a need so that the 'what links here' for to the lists can be accessed to see where B roads are mentioned in articles - this is in preference to piping to the list from the article. I will never delete an entry (as 217.36.107.9 has been doing for both A & B roads) by converting it to a redirect. Hope this clarifies things. Best Wishes Saga City (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello again Arb

I apologise for my confusion over edits concerning yourself. I have had dealings with the editors you mention before and in most communications they have been very uncompromising and suffer from some sort of Road snobbery. It will be interesting to see what happens concerning these B roads. Thanks for your information. stavros1 ''']] ♣


 * `requested page protection for B1149 & B1436 would you do the same for the B1159 please`, request done. May I suggest installing Twinkle Twinkle.    Regards --palmiped |  Talk  16:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

B Roads in Norfolk, Again?
Hello Arb,

As you to have an interest in Norfolk B roads, can you have another look at Talk:B1149 road, B1156 road, B1436 road and B1149 road again, as these article seem to be under threat again from another editor. Once again it is the Notability question which has arisen. I thought that the reason for these roads to be notable had already been established but once again this is being questioned and I think there is likelihood that this editor may redirect these pages once more. any contribution to the disscussion would be very helpful.  stavros1  ♣  22:35 28 September 2008 (UTC).

Moravian things
Hello Arb. Have tried to mail as suggested but unsure whether successfully. Do you know of any printed sources for future articles on Lancs congregations or Brn Hassell and Harp? Curiously, have driven on B1159 road today which you say is of particular interest to you. May well write on Paston St Margaret's church myself yet. There is an interesting account in the Paston Letters of an argument in the churchyard after divine service about diversion of the high road in the mid 15th century. It ran behind the church then, which is presumably why the lych gate is at the back. Westwood lad (talk) 22:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Lifeboat Stations in Norfolk
Hello Arb,

Well done with your efforts with the nav-box for lifeboats. I agree with you totally. The one nav box is a great solution to what was becoming a rather messy affair. The only thing I would add though is that it is looking a bit top heavy (i.e. Cromer) contents wise. Maybe someone could add something about the other lifeboats in Norfolk as the county has such a rich history concerning lifeboats, shipwrecks and rescues. I will try to add some content to wikipedia about Sheringham lifeboats in the future but I have very little information about others in Norfolk.  stavros1  ♣  21:00 10 January 2009 (UTC).

Nice to be appreciated (smile). It happens that way with nav-boxes sometimes. Even Cromer has a lot of redlinks... -Arb. (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Ruby and Arthur Reed
Just a quick question. Why the three ??? by the Launch date? Of Ruby and Arthur Reed. Did I get that wrong.  stavros1  ♣  00:59 13 January 2009 (UTC).

Are!!! yes I Did!!! Thanks for spotting that.Stavros1 (talk) 01:04, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Looks like you copied and pasted the entire infobox then forgot to amend some of it. Easily done. -Arb. (talk) 01:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Info Box Sheringham Lifeboat station
Hi Arb

I agree with you completely and as it happens I tried several times to incorporate the information that you have suggested but I corrupted the box. I don’t know what I was doing wrong!, Do you think that if you have a minute you could have ago at creating the box?, I certainly think it would enhance the page. It could also replace the box on the Great Yarmouth and Gorleston lifeboat station page.  stavros1  ♣  12:05 16 January 2009 (UTC).

CfD nomination of Category:Writers of the Moravian Church
I have nominated writers of the moravian church for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Editor2020 (talk) 03:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

New project proposal - Norfolk & Suffolk
Hi

I have proposed a new project "Wikiproject Norfolk & Suffolk" and would appreciate any support that I can get for getting this through.

I did think of making it a task force, but that would limit action as it would have to belong to a parent.

Many thanks--Chaosdruid (talk) 04:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Moravian congregations
Hello, Arb. Sorry for being dense but I can't find the template for new congregation articles. Can you remind me where it is, please? Best wishes Westwood lad (talk) 14:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. It's here. -Arb. (talk) 14:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Oswald.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Oswald.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Image restored to article Oswald (TV series)‎‎. -Arb. (talk) 23:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Lighthouses in Jamaica
Hi Arb,

The list of lighthouses in Jamaica article does not contain much more information than is expected in "List of" articles as you have suggested. Each lighthouse is provided with only one to four lines of description. Take the List of characters in Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow as an example; this is a featured article, and each entry is provided with a paragraph description that goes far beyond what is included on the list of lighthouses in Jamaica. The List of Final Fantasy compilation albums and the List of unmade Doctor Who serials and films are two other good examples. I have not been attempting to make the article's name fit the template that [I] wanted to add to it; the list of lighthouses in Jamaica is a list, and the title should reflect that.

Neelix (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Xtabi
Hello,

Thanks for the input regarding the Xtabi page. I have a citation for the Keith Richards reference, but it is contained in a hard-copy book which is not available on-line. The book is titled Keith Richards: In His Own Words (Omnibus Press)(June 1994) ISBN-13: 978-0711936348. Would this be allowable as a citation? Banjoman1 (talk) 03:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * References that are hard-copy only are fine. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Citation_styles -Arb. (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Lifeboat stations in Norfolk
Hello Arb Don’t know much about the Mundesley lifeboat I’m afraid so cant answer your question at the moment. Will see what I can find out next time I’m down that part of the coast  stavros1  ♣  20:34, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Jamaica College
Your thoughts on the page layout. Should we add more external links and references? Need the page to attain Featured Article status. —Preceding unsigned comment added by X01 (talk • contribs) 01:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting an article to FA is hard, and not something I have the time for just now. You might do better aiming for GA first. Take a look at WikiProject_Schools/Assessment (pop open the "More detailed criteria" for GA). Good luck. -Arb. (talk) 02:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Arb! I am currently gathering resources (school magazines, books, pictures etc.) to make a push towards GA status now. Indeed, one level at a time! I do not have a particular reason for having the section named 'Academics' instead of 'Curriculum'. If the rules are there, I will follow. As I read more, I'll understand the rules better. Again, thanks for your contributions as well. X01 (talk) 21:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Mr. Driver, I have patiently waited for near 3 months for the Jamaica College article to be copy-edited and reviewed. There is no evidence that this has been done to any degree. I also am in agreement with your observation that so far, only one recognised editor, Camaron · Christopher · talk, has given the article a review thus reducing the depth and breadth of review that you and I believe is required. I will assume that the school-based article is not 'complete' and is missing crucial elements, editors are extremely busy and the importance of the article does not warrant attracting immediate attention. Therefore I propose increasing the importance based on the institution's influence and contribution to the Jamaican society, especially athletics. Please guide me as to how to get some attention for this article without becoming annoying. X01 (talk) 17:31, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
∙  AJCham  talk 20:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Xtabi
It seems that some of the references I originally cited for historical aspects ofXtabi were not accurate. The Pirate's cave and Joseph's cave along the cliffs of Negril are more verifiable locations for pirates, movies, and rock stars. Since there are currently no Wikipedia pages for either of these caves, it is best to leave the questionable references off of the Xtabi page. I might start pages on these other caves if I can find enough interesting, and verifiable, information.Banjoman1 (talk) 02:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Amusment Park Category Clutter Clean Up in My Sandbox
No problem at all. Cheers. Peet Ern (talk) 08:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Complaint
Who are and who gives you the authority to decide what is suitable to be displayed on school pages. Why do you put what you deem as "encyclopedic". -Pucks
 * It's not me, it's the Wikipedia community. That's why I provided links to various bits of policy and convention in the various posts on Talk:St. Catherine High School‎‎. Take a look at some of them and then, if you think I'm wrong say clearly why in each case and we'll take it from there. The learning curve here is quite steep and it can be very frustrating to begin with but the smart one's get through it quickly so I'm sure you will too. -Arb. (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Ordnance Survey
Probably because that is where the offices are currently located. Not everything with geocoords needs a location map.©Geni 00:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ordnance Survey International
Hello! Your submission of Ordnance Survey International at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 04:27, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Did You Know problem
Hello! Your submission of Nereus (Martian crater) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! (Note: I always leave approvals to others.) Art LaPella (talk) 00:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Desktop Color Separations
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Desktop Color Separations, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://desktoppub.about.com/od/dcsopi/g/dcs.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Desktop Color Separations
A tag has been placed on Desktop Color Separations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  Btilm 23:37, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Unref stub
Yes there was some objection to "tags overwhelming stubs". For this reason the auto parameter hides the tag. There is no reason that this behaviour can't be changed in future. Rich Farmbrough, 01:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC).
 * This would perhaps be worth bringing up at Village Pump Rich Farmbrough, 17:50, 18 December 2009 (UTC).

Convert
Yes and no. Convert is great when you have something dynamic in particular, for example embedding in other templates. However there are drawbacks with its use, see any article and look at the transcluded junk at the bottom, I believe it is fair old server hog. Also it is not (and not intended to be) that smart. Then their is the problem of an article where the source unit is say 12 ft, someone changes it to 12 ft, 4 m, then to 4 m, 12 ft then to  4 m.  Finally conversion isn't always wanted, for example "he won the 400 m race" or he "put on his 10 gal hat". Rich Farmbrough, 02:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC).

Saratabidah
You should know that consensus is against using a direct machine translation (Translation), if you look at the article you've created its almost unintelligible, and since you've translated it, it can no longer be deleted.--Jac 16888 Talk 22:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I figured the direct translation was a start, not the end. A basis for further research. Patience my friend. What's the rush? -Arb. (talk) 22:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of Goud Saraswat Brahmin surnames
I have nominated List of Goud Saraswat Brahmin surnames for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/List of Goud Saraswat Brahmin surnames. 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. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Southland Astronomical Society
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Southland Astronomical Society. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Southland Astronomical Society. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Golden Clouds
Hi Arb,

I just returned from the North Coast of Jamaica, and have written an article about a property of historical interest, Golden Clouds. I was hoping you could have a look at it and perhaps work your magic with coords, infobox, and aerial view. Banjoman1 (talk) 00:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ -Arb. (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Escuela San Felipe
I see that you have deprodded the article, however the concerns I had, that is, that there is no indication that this school meets our precedents for inherent notability for schools (we don't even know whether it's a grammar school or a high school) have not been addressed. Have you found enough references to establish the school's notability? --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 02:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Suggestions on Bede House Old Aberdeen
I am confused by the comments on the in-line citations. There are references. Can you help?09:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)Ray Oaks (talk)
 * Replied at User_talk:Ray_Oaks. -Arb. (talk) 16:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Hatnotes at trepanning
Your last edit states: "Trepanning (manufacturing) redirects to Drilling#Trepanning and has done since, er, User:Wizard191 created it." How is this applicable to the existence of ? There is still no link for Trepanning (manufacturing) at Trepanation (disambiguation), therefore the hatnote should stay. Wizard191 (talk) 16:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * As I understand it, Trepanning (manufacturing) is actually a form of drilling. That is what the redirect that you created implies. If it is a subject in its own right then
 * the redirect is incorrect
 * there should then be an entry for it at Trepanation (disambiguation).
 * If it is not a subject in its own right then "Redirects should be orphans" applies. -Arb. (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Oi. You really want this trepanation (disambiguation) page to exist at any cost. The process of trepanning, with respect to drilling, is never called trepanation, therefore it shouldn't be listed at trepanation (disambiguation). Thus the reason for the hatnote. BTW, the redirect is correct. Wizard191 (talk) 17:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * For the record, you are mistaken; I'm just trying to understand and get right something that ought to be very simple but for some reason isn't. Perhaps if you presume I'm a simpleton and spell the whole issue out slowly and in full then I'll get it. But consider pondering on it until tomorrow; it sounds as though you need to chill a little. -Arb. (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not trying to be condescending (and if I come across that way I apologize), but in my mind I set the whole thing straight on January 13th, the only thing I couldn't do myself was delete the lingering trepanation (disambiguation). Now you are trying to "revive" it for a reason I can yet to understand. Just because there are legitimate links on the page (a reason you give for keeping it) exist doesn't mean the article should exist. For instance, pitch is currently a disambig page; I could duplicate it at pitch (disambiguation) and all of the links are legit, but that doesn't mean the page should exist, because its redundant and nothing links to it. This is the same situation (except the original page is an article and not a disambig page). Wizard191 (talk) 17:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That is an argument that might more usefully be made on the deletion discussion page. My difficulty (and the subject we can usefully discuss here) is that I did not fully understand your explanation on the 13th or those since. So I was being serious, why don't you try presuming I'm a simpleton and spell the whole issue out very slowly and in full. Perhaps use bullet points (or other structure) as well as plain text. It'll take you a little time but then so does writing these messages. -Arb. (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice work
Spreading around the theology template. Your idea? -- Kendrick7talk 05:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Land stewardship
Thank you very much for your discussion about my started page Land stewardship. I can't write very well in English, and I cannot maintain any discussion in favour of my proposed name for this article. However, I believe this deletion is an error.--Climent Sostres (talk) 14:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to agree with you. That's why it's not just a redirect but a redirect with possibilities (note its category). You could do one of two things from here:


 * 1) Rebuild the article in you user space (eg at User:Climent Sostres/Land Stewardship) and then, once it is more rounded, ask a friendly admin to move it over the redirect.
 * 2) Expand the article section it redirects to (Stewardship) to include your material and then, if and when it becomes large enough, move your content to the redirect page and back-link to it with main.


 * You may already know that you can still get hold of your content here.


 * Good luck. -Arb. (talk) 14:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks one more time, but I'm not able to follow your kindly instructions. If you believe that my argue is valid, I invite you to restart the page. I can't work in an English environtment by myself, sorry. Some materials you can use, if you would attempt it, are available in the pages fr:Gestion conservatoire and ca:Custòdia del territori. Goodbye, my friend.--Climent Sostres (talk) 15:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Bede House Old Aberdeen
I do not understand the comments made on inline citations etc. I have complied with all of the comments - but your header appears out of date??. If there is something I do not understand - please explain. I am in the process of updating the entry as new evidence appears. Ray —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray Oaks (talk • contribs) 10:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Already replied at User_talk:Ray_Oaks. -Arb. (talk) 11:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Hablützel Ferris Wheel
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Hablützel Ferris Wheel. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Hablützel Ferris Wheel. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

MAGS Observatory and RASNZ
Don't undo this again. The RASNZ Education Section is no longer based at MAGS, as of Jan 2010. I know, seeing as I was the Director of the RASNZ Education Section, and I am currently the Director of the MAGS Observatory. Thanks anyway.
 * That may or not not be so but on Wikipedia it is not what one knows (or who one is) but what the sources say. If you have a reference that you can cite to verify the change please do so. Otherwise it is liable to be reverted. Also, please sign your posts to talk pages by appending ~ which the system will convert for you. -Arb. (talk) 23:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Have a look at the second of the external links. You will see that all references to RASNZ have been removed. The change is verified. Perhaps you shouldn't revert or change things that you can't verify? or do the rules not apply to you..Gmoney484 (talk) 03:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Which particular rule are you referring to? -Arb. (talk) 03:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: Paragraph again removed from article. No reply here. Conversation continued at User talk:Gmoney484. -Arb. (talk) 13:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe that you are edit warring to retain some information which is unsourced and which another established contributor says is no longer accurate. Please assume good faith from that contributor, and if you believe he is incorrect, find a new source to support the paragraph before readding it.- gadfium 19:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. You are right of course; finding a source for the historically interesting factoid would be a better way forward. -Arb. (talk) 11:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Bekonscot Railway(s)?
Hi. I don't understand your assertion regarding Template:Ridable miniature railways in England. Although there are two railway systems at Bekonscot (three if you include the relics of the contractor's 2ft gauge line), only one is actually ridable by 12"-to-the-foot humans, hence my change.

EdJogg (talk) 10:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I hadn't read it closely enough. Have revert the template to the singular form. -Arb. (talk) 10:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Blue_Water_Sailing_magazine_front_cover_2010-02.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Blue_Water_Sailing_magazine_front_cover_2010-02.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Lifeboat stations in Norfolk
Hello Arb You sent me this (photo) link on 30 August 2009. Just to let you Know that I have since been to visit the Mundesley Lifeboat station and have created an article Mundesley lifeboat station which you may find of interest.  stavros1  ♣  21:53, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. Good article. Have been away for a while so have only just seen your pointer. Do let me know if you create any more. -Arb. (talk) 01:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Disused railway stations (Plymouth to Penzance Line)
Hi Arb, regarding your edit of Disused railway stations (Plymouth to Penzance Line), the text was correct. There are two viaducts, one either side of the former station. Chacewater viaduct is 297 feet long, 52 feet at its highest, and has five arches each of of 45 feet span. Blackwater viaduct is 396 feet long, 68 feet at its highest, and has seven arches each of 45 feet span. The two viaducts are recorded in detail in Brunel's Cornish Viaducts by John Binding (Atlantic, ISBN 0-906899-56-7) which I have open before me as I write. More pertinently, both viaducts are clearly marked on the current OS Landranger sheet 204 Truro & Falmouth (ISBN 9780319231494). To compare the modern map with a pre-war OS map that shows the station, the viaducts and Blackwater Junction go to http://wtp2.appspot.com/wheresthepath.htm (Where's The Path), search for Chacewater, then select the option to display "OS + 1930's OS". Best wishes, Andy F (talk) 00:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair enough (haven't checked, will take your word for it). Might be an idea to give those citations in the article itself though, together with the more detailed description you have provided here. -Arb. (talk) 00:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Edit: The station and one of the viaducts can be seen here. Blackwater junction is here (the triangle of trees north of the dual carriage way). So the second viaduct should be about here. Can you spot it? -Arb. (talk) 00:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I've look at Wikimapia. I've also studied the current OS map. I am sure now that both viaducts are east (the 'up' or Truro direction) of Chacewater station. According to the Binding book, the one immediately east of the station is named Blackwater Viaduct; the one further east is Chacewater Viaduct. If you agree, we can edit the article to reflect that. Andy F (talk) 00:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Yup. I've found it and the length measurements tally so have added Chasewater to Wikimapia and renamed the one that was already there Blackwater. Might be best for you to make the changes here on Wikipedia as you've been more involved in the article than me. Good sleuthing. -Arb. (talk) 01:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice one, Arb – thanks. Andy F (talk) 01:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Bridges in Toronto
I noticed that you are the template writer for Bridges in Toronto. I am working on a list article of the bridges of the Don River Valley and I'd like your opinion whether I should split it and how I would integrate it with the template. You can see it here. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 00:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My instinct is that a list article should be literally that, a list, with links to articles for each item it contains (where these exist). That would significantly shorten your article so there would be no need to even consider splitting it.  There would be no need to discard all the good material you have added as this could be moved into the articles for the individual bridges or used to create new articles for those bridges that do not have one. YMMV. Once your article goes live it will be simple to add a link to it in each relevant river's row, most probably as the first entry in the lists of bridges. -Arb. (talk) 16:03, 16 May 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, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection 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.

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 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) 18:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Infobox Ferris wheel
A tag has been placed on Template:Infobox Ferris wheel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Re:Connie Talbot & The Marine Toys for Tots Foundation press release
I'm not particularly attached to it, it just helps pad out that rather short section, and, more importantly, say something about the most recent album, for which details are thin on the ground. It also helps provide a little context, giving the view of the organisation in question. She's not done much recently, so far as I know... J Milburn (talk) 13:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's about her relationship with the TFT Foundation, which is wholly linked to her third album (concerning which we now have a whole one and a half lines). Not really seeing the urgency to remove. J Milburn (talk) 21:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Noel Coward's Firefly Estate
Hello Arb, I have written an article about a property of historical interest in Jamaica, Noel Coward's Firefly Estate. I was hoping you could have a look at it and work your magic with coords, infobox, and aerial view. Banjoman1 (talk) 01:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:Infobox Ferris wheel/doc
Template:Infobox Ferris wheel/doc, 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/Template:Infobox Ferris wheel/doc and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Template:Infobox Ferris wheel/doc 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. Kumioko (talk) 04:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Jamaican prison list
Hey! I moved the Jamaican prisons to their official names as per the Jamaican prison ministry lists. Now the template points to the correct names. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * So, the Americanisation of Jamaican vernacular continues. Shrug. -Arb. (talk) 14:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Waddingtons
Template:Waddingtons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. SnottyWong comment 17:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dragon spacecraft
A tag has been placed on Dragon spacecraft, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Template:Theology
Fair enough. I'm wondering though why its showing up on the disam link list (links to about 200 articles). It didn't a few days ago. I didn't see any change that triggered it, but I admit that I didn't look very closely. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 02:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Could it have been edit of yours? -Arb. (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Coalyard Miniature Railway
Template:Coalyard Miniature Railway has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica
WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica, 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/Wikipedia:WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica 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. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  20:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have closed the discussion as userfy. I noticed you had already copied the page to your userspace; however, I have moved it to your userspace at the same location and deleted the page that was in the way, this preserves the history.  I also moved the two subpages that the project had and all associated talk pages.  You can find the project at: User:Arb/WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica.  Thanks and if you have any questions, please let me know.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 12:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of non-Jamaicans who have served Jamaica


The article List of non-Jamaicans who have served Jamaica has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Only four items, one of which is a redlink. Four items is not a list.

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 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 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. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Jamaican railroad with railcar and station 1960.jpg
Hi, I found the above photo but I have no idea what railcar is shown where on Jamaica. Maybe you can help? Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Bryan Versteeg for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bryan Versteeg 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 Articles for deletion/Bryan Versteeg 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 template from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 03:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Your GOCE request
Hi. I am declining your request for a GOCE copy edit of Caribbean Policy Research Institute. You are essentially asking us to paraphrase a primary and self-published source, in an article where many of the other references are dead links. What the article needs is to find some secondary sources and to rewrite it using those. This isn't a copy editing job. Sorry. --Stfg (talk) 12:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. -Arb. (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Randykitty (talk) 10:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

WT:AST
-- 70.24.250.110 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Ca–Al-rich inclusion
I see you added the meteorites navbox, but shouldnt the article be in the navbox before you add it? Apologies if its in there and I didnt see it. [User:Dmadeo|dm]] (talk) 01:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Good catch. Fixed. -Arb. (talk) 09:28, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

New messages at Bot requests
Wolfgang42 11:58 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Hedonism Resorts
Hi, Arb, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, or to correct or revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. This article has a few problems (referencing for one), and it really should have gone to WP:CLEANUP, so please don't expect a miracle. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done - feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:44, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks Baffle gab1978. This one needed a specialist's skills and got them; it's far more readable now. -Arb. (talk) 11:21, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Infobox meteorite
I don't know if you have this on your watch list. I would love to get your opinion on this: (Template_talk:Infobox_meteorite) --Tobias1984 (talk) 17:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)



Template problems
Could you take a look at the template in this section for me. It doesn't quite render right. (Meteorite_classification). The upper left corner shows: " v |t [:Template:Fullurl:Template: e] " instead of just "v t e". --Tobias1984 (talk) 17:42, 23 December 2012 (UTC)



Category:Meteorite journals
Category:Meteorite journals, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Randykitty (talk) 18:49, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK Zaklodzie meteorite
I've reviewed your DYK; it all checks out, but there is one minor formatting fix required. Inline citations should not be in the introductory paragraph. As the introduction should be a summary of the article, so the citations should all be in the article body. Please update the DYK template when you're done, and I'll give your nomination the green tick. Wikiwayman (talk) 15:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Ataxite
Good idea putting the phase diagram into the infobox. That looks very organized. --Tobias1984 (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Diogenite
I just saw that you made Diogenite into a subgroup of the HED meteorites. I'm pretty sure that Diogenites are a group and it is probably the HED clan. --Tobias1984 (talk) 22:44, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are the expert round here. If I get things wrong then please, just fix them. Your edit summaries are wonderfully clear and sufficient explanation. -Arb. (talk) 22:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Strewn field
Hi! Take a look here. -- Basilicofresco  (msg) 19:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for IVB meteorites
The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)