User talk:Francish7

A barnstar for you!

 * Oooo! For me? Thank you! Francis Hannaway (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Hi Francis - can you help please? Ta! DBaK (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Move of Diocese of Chester
Hello. I noticed you moved the above article. I'm interested in whether you did this as some greater decision about naming of such things, of which I am obviously unaware, or whether it was one done on your own initiative? Has it been made to make the naming convention consistent across other UK dioceses in the CoE? Many thanks. DDStretch   (talk)  22:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi - this is to make a consistent naming convention for Christianity based pages. Although the naming of CoE dioceses has a conventional naming procedure prejudicial to its established position in England, this does not comply with an international perspective of equal status to all denominations on Wikipedia. With this in mind, naming of all denominations should be stated in the page title. Francis Hannaway (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but it doesn't really answer the question of whether you are doing it by yourself, or whether it has been discussed and decided upon elsewhere and you are merely implementing an explicit decision made in another place.  DDStretch    (talk)  22:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you - this is not taking place by action of a Bot - but through different editors. Check through editing history to see who is making these changes. Best wishes Francis Hannaway (talk) 22:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (e/c) Sorry. I ought to have added that I'm not wishing to argue with you, I just want to know if there is mileage in being a bit more active inb making a consistent approach: for example Diocese of Leeds gives a disambiguation page, in which case Diocese of Chester might be a redirection (because there is no Roman Catholic Diocese of Chester), just as has happened with Diocese of Manchester. What do you think? It might help people unaware of these issues to find the correct pages.  DDStretch    (talk)  22:39, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Any help would be great! Roman Catholic dioceses tend to be stated as such ... but to be consistent, each denomination should have its own nominal adjective of Anglican, Methodist, etc. The situation is most pertinent in England because of the CoE's position as the "established" denomination. From an international perspective, for Wikipedia, it is best to be have a view which is consistent across the English speaking world - which includes countries for which Anglicanism is not the "established" denomination. Best wishes Francis Hannaway (talk) 22:48, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

(conflict) Stop, stop, STOP! Church of England dioceses which have no counterparts do not need disambiguating! Their names do not involve the word Anglican because they do not need to – they are established in the land in which they exist. If you want to change Wikipedia policy, then start a discussion. Until then, kindly desist. DBD 22:49, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This has woried me about all this. The actual name of the one I know something about is Diocese of Chester, and I think that needs to be somewhere searchable on wikipedia. Perhaps we should not force a unilateral change without discussion, which is why I was asking about the source of the changes. It seems to me now, that the changes need to be, at least, put on hold until the matter is discussed by others and a consensus is achieved.  DDStretch    (talk)  22:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The search process is taken into account. Try searching for any Anglican Diocese - it will appear. The Leed one is an exception because the Anglican one doesn't exist yet. Francis Hannaway (talk) 22:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You have been asked to stop and to discuss. Your continued non-compliance will only get you a ban. If you absolutely must continue your vandalism now, then be my guest – I would much rather wait 'til the morning and clean up all of your mess in one convenient purge. DBD 23:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * PLEASE stop edit warring back ... you were bold, you got reverted, now ... you discuss rather than redo the move. It's driving my watchlist nuts. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * DBD, whatever you think of Francis's edits please do not misuse the term "vandalism" like that. Please have a look at the definitions of vandalism in the first line of WP:VAND and also at the explanation of what is not vandalism at WP:NOTVAND. When you do, you will realize that vandalism is not "edits with which I disagree'; indeed it is not even "edits which I think are completely bl**dy stupid"; it has a tight definition, which Francis's behaviour does not in any way resemble. Francis has never committed an act of vandalism on this encyclopaedia and never will; to wrongly accuse someone of vandalism is offensive and foolish; you should strike through your remark and apologize. I hope this helps. With thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 07:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I really am not happy now about all of this after looking into it. I originally asked whether the changes had been decided upon somewhere else, rather than being done single-handedly by a single editor's initiative, and the reply I got was "Thank you - this is not taking place by action of a Bot - but through different editors. Check through editing history to see who is making these changes. ". However, on looking at the move logs for such dioceses, I see that this was a lie, because almost all the moves have been done by this talk page's editor. So, my direct message to this editor now is this: given that you lied to a direct question from me, and I am an administrator, then unless you stop, *I* will take steps to issue you with a ban. DDStretch   (talk)  23:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm am SHOCKED that you describe my very clear statements as a lie, and would be very pleased to have you retract that accusation. There are other editors clarifying pages about Anglican dioceses - just look at edit histories and you will see them. Which part do you think was a lie ... I can only tell the truth. Francis Hannaway (talk) 23:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You claimed that others were making these changes, but I can see that in your edit history, you have made many changes to such articles, and not much evidence of anyone else making these changes. If you wish me to, I will withdraw the word "lie", but will add that you were less than complate in your description of what was being done, since you are the main instigator of changes at the moment, as far as I can see.  DDStretch    (talk)  23:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * IMHO, it would be sufficient to add (Anglican) after "Church of England" in the lede section of each article. I can accept that not everyone would know that CofE means Anglican, so would happily agree to that clarification. Most of all matey, I'd be quite happy to have a reasonable discussion with you about why you ought not to have made these edits (let alone continued once reverted and called out!) DBD 23:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I quite agree.  DDStretch    (talk)  23:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Many of these dioceses you have moved were originally established as Roman Catholic dioceses which at the Reformation they became Anglican ones. To call them by either denomination would be wrong. The other dioceses do not need to be disambiguated because there are no another dioceses of a different denomination with the same name. Making a one off bold move may be acceptable, but making mass moves is not. You need to discuss this with other editors and see if a consensus can be reached. – Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Francish7 A lot of people put a lot of effort into making the Anglican pages on Wikipedia as good as they can be. Please join us in working collaboratively to gain a consensus as to how unique diocese names are recorded Bashereyre (talk) 08:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Common name
Hi Frank. I see you've removed "Roman Catholic" from the bolded names in three dioceses' ledes. In your edit summary you dismiss the inclusion of "Roman Catholic" as unnecessary disambiguation. I have un-done these edits because your assumption is incorrect – this is not disambiguation at all. Rather, each diocese is overwhelmingly known as "Roman Catholic Diocese of ..." – i.e. that is its WP:COMMONNAME: (In fact, both Middlesbro and Hexham's official websites loudly proclaim "Roman Catholic Diocese of ..." – and Hallam's prominently features "Catholic Diocese of Hallam.") DBD 14:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "Diocese of Middlesbrough" 4,850 40,300 "Roman Catholic Diocese of Middlesbrough"
 * "Diocese of Hexham" 3,930 261,000 "Roman Catholic Diocese of Hexham"
 * "Diocese of Hallam" 1,420 64,900 "Roman Catholic Diocese of Hallam"

Bieber
Hi Francish7. Could you please make your proposed changes to the lead of the article on the talk page first, to see if consensus exists. The material is rather controversial. Thanks. Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 12:21, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Justin Bieber
Good day, Francish7. I undid your recent contributions to the article on Justin Bieber because they seem to be passing judgement on the subject rather than simply stating facts, backed by citations. I realise your edits are in good faith and the subject's behaviour attracts huge media coverage, but we should surely refrain from expressing an opinion not attributed to a reputable source.

Kind regards

Guffydrawers (talk) 12:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=594388218 your edit] to Ormesby 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Architects Kitching & Co of Middlesbrough designed both rows in the fashionable Arts and Crafts Movement|Arts and Crafts Vernacular style.

Leith, North Dakota
Hi-the North Dakota law regulates what is a city in that state no matter how big or small the community is. There is nothing in North Dakota state law about hamlets in that state. Please take your concerns to the Leith, North Dakota talk page-thanks-01:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Redcar and Cleveland
The unitary authority refers to the council, therefore the LGD with the unitary council is known as a unitary authority area. This term is not interchangeable and is the standard phrase used on most of the unitary authority area articles, in the lead. Would you revert your revert?  Rcsprinter123    (lecture)  @ 14:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I must say I've never heard of - but you seem to know ... Francis Hannaway (talk) 15:04, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Leeds meetup
Hello! I don't know if you're aware but there is a wikimedia meet up in Leeds this Saturday (14 June) if you're interested. Hopefully you can make it. Regards IJA (talk) 17:27, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Berwick Hills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Park 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) 08:50, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

William M. Branham article
I saw your comment re bias in the article on William Branham.

I have done a lot of research on the subject of William Branham and agree with your comments. I would certainly be interested in helping out with improving this article if you are so inclined. Taxee (talk) 17:22, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Taxee! Thank you for your kind message. I'm very pleased to know that you are interested in making the Branham article more balanced. I've just looked back over the talk page and most of the POV support comes from a Branhamist groupie called Rev107. Yes there's lots out there to make the article more balanced. My main concerns are that William Branham preyed on people from Hicksville, in the days when things weren't so easily verifiable. Also, he made himself into a kind of deity. He used selective, and often discredited theology - dipping in and outof the development of the main Christian church. His movement continues to hoodwink people in developing countries - which is where my experience of his sect comes from. Unfortunately, because of other commitments, I will not be able to spend much time on this project - but I would be very pleased if you and other editors could be bold yet not reckless in making things clearer for this article. I will be able to see what you are doing from time to time and share my opinion. Best of luck with it! Francis Hannaway (talk) 13:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Francis! I am making a couple of edits to the article but may need your help if they are reverted by the Branham follower that stands guard over the page.  Taxee (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HIV/AIDS in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Leuven. 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) 09:32, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carey Mulligan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page War Child. 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) 00:47, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)



Savvyjack23 (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:42, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello
Hello Francis,

You're very quiet on Wikipedia at the moment. Are you OK?

Best wishes, DBaK (talk) 15:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi DBaK!

I’m very well thanks – I hope you are too.  You may know that I have contributed to several pages related to the Democratic Republic of Congo – including Basankusu. I am actually living and working in Basankusu at the moment. We have a satellite link to the internet at our house, but it is so slow that it takes two hours to upload a two minute YouTube quality video. I’m very busy with projects for malnourished children, schools for orphans and wheelchairs-bikes for people who can’t walk because of Polio … that’s all on top of my day job. I raise funds by making videos and taking photos and publishing them on facebook, YouTube and Blogger. You are most welcome to look at my stuff … friend me if you like, but no obligation – my pages are open to everyone to view. Wikipedia comes a bit down the to-do list for the moment … it’s difficult to open more than one browser page at a time. Can I just say how pleased I was to see you message and that you’d taken the time to think about me – I’m really impressed! I have had a little look at Middlesbrough/Teesside pages now and then (and Guisborough Priory of course) – maybe I’ll get back to it eventually. Best wishes Francis Hannaway (talk) 17:59, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Muriel Robin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montbrison. 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) 09:55, 26 March 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 geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! 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, whether it's a river in Malawi, a Nigerian footballer, or a South African civil rights activist, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. For those of you who signed up to the North African contest, that will hopefully be held in the new year. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed
Hello Francish7! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! &mdash; MusikBot II  talk  22:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Middlesbrough
Hello you just reverted my edit on Middlesbrough as the largest settlement. Can you please reference how this is the largest settlement given it is part of Teeside. York borough is bigger 208,000 and Middlesbrough is 174,000. It's obvious york is bigger than Middlesbrough. Provide source saying that Middlesbrough is the largest then. Or I'll revert the edit back to my one. TarzanBoy24 (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The page entitled "Middlesbrough" is stated as describing the town of Middlesbrough (where I live). A part of the town of Middlesbrough is within the unitary authority of Middlesbrough Borough. Middlesbrough Borough is not all of Middlesbrough. Similarly, the Parliamentary Constituency of Middlesbrough, does not include the whole of Middlesbrough. You seem to think there is a place called Teeside - perhaps that's the land at the side of the River Tee ... I'm not sure. Perhaps you were referring to Teesside - a former County Borough. Teesside also refers to the land around the River Tees. This definition is much greater than the town of Middlesbrough - it includes Stockton, Billingham, and Redcar, which are not considered part of the town of Middlesbrough. If you look at the 'Middlesbrough' page, you'll see that suburbs are listed - some are listed with an asterisk. This indicates that, although they are part of Middlesbrough, they are not within the Borough of Middlesbrough. I live in Redcar and Cleveland Borough - also a unitary authority - but where I live is Middlesbrough. How does this compare with York? York is a lovely place; we all love York. However, York is isolated ... it's not near other places. You could make the comparison that everything within the walls is 'York' ... but we all accept that those places 'without the walls' are also part of York. Taking all this into account - York is smaller than Middlesbrough. The reason I reverted your edit was nothing to do with this, however. It was because you changed an established statement on Wikipedia, but you didn't back it up with a specific reference. This is Original Research. If you want to re-instate your edit, other editors will agree with me I wish you a good day Francis Hannaway (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Right okay TarzanBoy24 (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Doug Barrowman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Doug_Barrowman check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Doug_Barrowman?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

King Tut
Besides your edit being wrong, you shouldn't use edit summaries to insult a group of people. Doug Weller talk 09:49, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

The original edit was unreferenced. Reference to "King Tut" is primarily, and always has been, American. National Geographic in particular, uses the expression. However, it's not in common use in spoken English, rather it's a space saving device for newspapers. The BBC, although not originally American, has a big broadcasting presence in the television world in the US. I can only think that Radii 4 is becoming lax in following the American erosion of the language. I would prefer the edit to say "also", or "sometimes" used, but "commonly" is pushing truth too far. Francis Hannaway (talk) 12:51, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Lol. Seriously, erosion? Languages change. British English has changed a lot in the last few decades, and I know of no surveys backing the idea that "King Tut" isn't used in spoken English. I've personally seen it used in UK newspapers and see it is used in Indian, Canadian and Australin media. It of course might be an Anglosphere thing.  Doug Weller  talk 16:28, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2023 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Leeds Wikipedia meetup on Saturday 4th May
Hello there! Interested in having a chat with fellow Wikipedians? There's a meetup in Leeds on Saturday 4th May 2024, at the Tiled Hall Café at Leeds Central Library.

Full details here.

You're receiving this one-off message as you're either a member of WikiProject Yorkshire, you've expressed an interest in a previous Leeds meetup years ago, or (for about 4 of you), we've met :)

I plan to organise more in future, so if you'd like to be notified next time, please say so over on the meetup page.

Please also invite any Wikimedia people you know (or have had wiki dealings with) – spread the word! Hope to see you there.

Jonathan Deamer (talk)

20:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)