User talk:C2r

Road Junction List
Hi C2r. Excellent work on the list! Looking really good. Am going to put together a template for a junction page in the next couple of days on a sandbox. Will let you know when I have a draft togther... Regan123 12:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Possible Additions
I have put the names of junctions on A38(M) motorway, A500 road and M55 motorway that you might want to add to the list. I haven't got time to pitch in yet, but I am going to link this table back to the Motorway junction lists. When I get finished with the motorways, I'll put this at the top of the to do list...

Cheers, Regan123 21:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Templates
As promised far too long ago, here are some templates. There is this one User:Regan123/sandbox4 which can be used on individual junction pages. The image is optional and I have a Photoshop file to do the road signs (if you want a copy let me know).

You can edit the code at User:Regan123/sandbox3.

For the bottom of the junction pages, look at User:Regan123/sandbox. Here I have tried to restrict it to the major junctions or those entries are primarily about a road junction. Again feel free to edit the code. Hope you like them! Regan123 21:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello - the sidebox template looks good.... I'm still updating the junction list page to update formatting, and add wiki internal links - I'd forgotton how long it took to create it in the first place, so updating is somewhat slow and therefore I'm not quite ready to embark on the next stage of the project!  I think that maybe rather than Construction began and ended, Construction Date (where available), and last major revision date would be better.  Also grid reference.


 * Then I guess on the page itself, we need a bit for each junction about the reasons why it's called what it is, ground based images where appropriate, diagrams of the junction where appropriate, and history of the layout of the junction - e.g 1964 Roundabout added; 1978 Grade Separated; 1996 roundabout signalised; again where the information is available. Slightly difficult, I suppose because junctions can be very different - e.g. compare Marble Arch with Charlie Browns - very long histories, but for different reasons.


 * As for the bottom of the junction pages, I like it... but I'm not sure how we decide what goes into it - the list in total contains lots of junctions, and even if 10% of these end up with their own pages, that'd be a lot of text at the bottom.... maybe we just provide links to the junctions page, and other lists pages, e.g. motorways in the united kingdom, lists of A and B roads, euroroutes, and MSAs in the UK (I noticed the messages proposing those for deletion, hopefully that's rejected now for good...)


 * Anyway, let us know your thoughts.... C2r 22:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I have updated the side box as per your suggestions so I think we have something nearly complete there. Don't disagree with your article suggestions, so I think we need to pick one and give it a go.  There is Almondsbury Interchange that looks ripe for improvement!


 * The bottom template needs some work still. The question revolves around what is major?  I don't disagree that we can't list every road junction otherwise the box will be bigger than the article.  I suppose it comes down to a subjective decision. There is a further option in a "series" box, like Template:Undergroundconnect which could provide the general links.  I have made some comments on Talk:Great Britain road numbering scheme - would like to hear your suggestions. Regan123 00:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, looking at South Mimms services, this one and some of the others appear to have been tagged for deletion again.  I don't really know enough about the Service Areas to be able to furnish the pages with sufficient info to stop them being deleted, maybe someone from Sabre does?  How does one go about objecting to the proposed deletion?  C2r 22:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Service Stations
There are two options to object. One add some information, which I am trying to do. Two: go to this discussion Articles for deletion/Washington services where I have also linked to a previous consensus to keep. We have about 4 days to save these articles so I am going to do my best! You could also remove the tag and put an objection on the talk page. I have done it with two and we'll see what happens. Regan123 22:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This I have done - I have added as much info as I can remember about South Mimms and removed the tag. C2r 00:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

List of road junctions
Thanks for spotting the mistake I made, I was going to rectify it, but my internet went down on me. Something clogging the tubes Will (Tell me, is something eluding you, sunshine?) 20:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No problems, easy mistake to make (just look at the edit history and you'll see how maany mistakes I've made editing it! I was on and saw that someone had actually updated the list (was beginning to think it was just me out there!). Feel free to update more (or better add proper pages about any 'notable' ones!  (though looking at your page looks like you're fairly busy as it is!)  C2r 20:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Metal Bridge
Hey, I noticed you added a part about Metal Bridge in Cumbria to the Metal Bridge, County Durham article. I'll create a disambugation page with links to both articles. I don't know whether Metal Bridge, Cumbria is a village or a hamlet, so I'll leave the Metal Bridge, Cumbria page for you to update. Also, in future, if the page on the object your referring to hasn't been created - create it. Logica 19:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

M58
Hi, sorry it was me that added the information to the article regarding the Orrell area of Wigan. I think we should clarify Orrell as the area of Wigan at the end point of the motorway to distinguish it as the end point (i.e. Wigan) rather than a place it runs through e.g. Skelmersdale. What do you thinks. Thanks  Man2 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Man2 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC).


 * Just a note to refer other readers to the Talk:Wigan page where talk to find a consensus on this is happening. C2r 21:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Chris
Thanks, I will consider getting an account, but you can probably guess who I am in any case, what with all these A13 junctions and stuff added to the relevant pages :)

194.80.106.135 11:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I finally decided to join up. Bit anonymous with an IP address, though I did forgot to login a few times this week. Still on SABRE? Sunil060902 13:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

UKRoads
Hi! long time, no speak. Wondered if you'd seen the formation of WP:UKROADS? Would love to see you there... Regan123 (talk) 19:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:A10 Wadesmill Rebuild May 2004.jpg
File:A10 Wadesmill Rebuild May 2004.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:A10 Wadesmill Rebuild May 2004.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sally Rainbow


The article Sally Rainbow has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unreferenced; wasn't able to find significant coverage"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. -- Tavix ( talk ) 23:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)