User talk:Graham Lippiatt

Edit summary and preview
Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:  The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. -- MightyWarrior (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Ref tag
No problem. When I first got here, those things drove me nuts. Sections going missing because of missing tags, figuring out the, the list goes on. Happy I could help!  TN ‑ X - Man  16:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Augustine Birrell
Hi, Graham. Thank you for adding "further reading" to the Augustine Birrell article. If any of the facts in the article are referenced by those articles (and I'm sure they must be) I would be grateful if you could change the citations accordingly. Having almost the whole article citing a single work is not ideal. Cheers. Scolaire (talk) 14:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Stephen Mason (MP)
Hey, thanks for your work with this article :). If you're knowledgeable about MP's in biographical terms you might want to check out the List of Stewards of the Manor of Northstead, now complete, which is a massive repository of (mostly) stubs. Ironholds (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm a LibDem supporter and politics student, so I understand where you're coming from. The list I sent is helpfull categorised, with the column on the far right showing the party of the MP in question; you might want to try there. Alternately if you go to MPs elected in the United Kingdom general election, 1906 you can find a full list by election, and work your way backwards and forwards from somewhere like there if you want to be more complete. Ironholds (talk) 18:03, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, also; the chiltern hundreds list is horribly out of date and slapdash; it'd be easier to avoid it if you want to be certain of getting as many as possible. Ironholds (talk) 18:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Elections in England and Wales, 1949
Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 17:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Stuart Samuel
Yes, by all means merge the two pages.Historicist (talk) 23:45, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Ironholds (talk) 02:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Coupon clippers
Thanks for your note. I added this sentence to the intro: "Recieving the coupon was an sign of patriotism that helped cnadidates gain election, while those who did not recieve it had a more difficult time as they were sometimes seen as anti-war or pacifist." I think more context of why the coupons were important and the background of war (not mentioned) would be helpful. Happy New Year! I hope it's a great one for you. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for correcting my lousy spelling and grammar. :) Can you add something about the background of war that made the coupon influential? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you put in a sentence or half a setence? The article should be able to stand alone. The effect of the coupon on the election helps, but its not clear why the government's endorsement had that effect. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks great. The word "heady" could probably be plucked, but otherwise it's all much clearer now. Gracias. Happy New Year. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Emrys Roberts
Hi - the infobox is based on just one source, the Liberal Democrat History Group. I've found the website quite reliable, but on further searching, I've not found any other evidence for Roberts holding the presidency in 1963-64. I can also find a source {A Guide to the Papers of British Cabinet Ministers, 1900-1964: 1900-1964‎) giving Ogmore as the president that year; if you have other or contemporary sources giving the same information, I'd certainly be inclined to agree that the LDHG website is more likely to be mistaken. Warofdreams talk 14:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Those sound excellent references. Thanks for checking, and happy new year! Warofdreams talk 14:53, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

James Hinton
In editing British Housewives' League you demonstrated awareness of James Hinton (historian), for whom i have put together a 1-screen-long stub which however fails to explicitly "indicate why its subject is important or significant". I'm delaying my creation of the article, lest it fall prey to an a7-speedy before someone in a better position to judge gets a chance to add a sincere claim of notability. Might that be you? --Jerzy•t 19:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

John Tosh
Concerning notability I personally don't see any problems with it. I tend to look upon published authors as notable. My major concern with this article would be the citations used. Aesthetically I would advise you to look at Template:Cite book & Template:Cite web. Personally I try to avoid websites like Google books but that's just me. Phrases like "updated the way we look at the study of history" are pretty major claims and need clear citations. Many PhDs teach and write about historiography but that doesn't make them another Braudel. Also I don't think Wikipedia articles should be arguments so claims like "Tosh's claim to originality and notability" aren't necessary. Just recount what happened and cite what you add. I hope that helps. I'm curious though, why would you ask me? I put a no citation tag on this page a while back but I think that's the only edit I made. Na uf ana :  talk  22:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Graham, I have removed the offending material from John Tosh, and made some comments on the talk page. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Eric MacFadyen
I redirected the Eric MacFadyen article to the Eric Macfadyen article. Actually, by default, if the two spellings are identical, apart from capitalisation, someone entering the spelling with the capital "F" would have gone straight to the article. You might want to nominate the redirect for deletion using a template; it's not vital, but it would discourage people from linking to the redirect page rather than the article.  FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 23:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * (Reply) You know what they say about the road to hell and good intentions...; yes, I think the message I left on the Requested moves page got misunderstood. All that needed to be done was to have the MacFadyen page (with a big "F") deleted and that was it; I should have been a bit clearer (or at least, louder) in saying that there was no move needed. I'll drop a note on tn the talk page of the admin who moved the pages.   FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 15:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Or I could just move the article over the redirect myself. Article is at Eric Macfadyen now, with editing history intact and I'll nominate the MacFadyen article, with a big F (now an unecessary redirect), for deletion as a housekeeping task.  FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 15:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * (Replying) Oh, it's one of those things that happen no matter how careful you are, particularly when there are different capitalized red links. I think I managed once to be in a situation where I had to move something at least four times. If it happens, the best thing to do is work from the first article, even if it is at the wrong version of the name. Normally, you should be able to move the original article to the proper place; that will leave you with a redirect at the first spelling which you might want to nominate for an uncontroversial deletion if necessary. And in a case like this, as you found, there are cases where there are more than one version of a name in use on Wikipedia, it means that alternate spellings or punctuation are found and fixed by linking to the correct version, so in the long run, while it might be frustrating for a minute or two, it isn't a bad thing that it happened.  FlowerpotmaN &middot;(t) 19:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

John Tosh again
I'm a little confused about John Tosh's educational details. I gather that you were the first person to introduce the information that he gained his BA at Oxford and MA at Cambridge. I'm sure you know that the degree of MA awarded by Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin is not like the MA anywhere else. If he had been an Oxford MA he could have incorporated as an MA at Cambridge, but as he is only an Oxford BA he cannot have done this, unless perhaps he incorporated BA and later proceeded MA at Cambridge without bothering with his Oxford MA (if this is possible). Or he could have been a Cambridge BA who incorporated BA at Oxford, later taking the Cambridge MA but not taking the degree at Oxford. Perhaps the more likely option is that he received his BA at Oxford, never bothering with the MA, and became a Cambridge MA by decree, special resolution, or whatever they call the procedure at Cambridge. But as it currently reads, anybody who does not understand the system would think that his Cambridge MA was a postgraduate qualification, much as one would say, "X gained his BA at Bristol and his MA at Nottingham".--Oxonian2006 (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Ronald Wilberforce Allen
Hi, just wanted to say thanks for the great job you did on the Ronald Wilberforce Allen article. I was planning on getting round to writing an article on him myself, but you beat me to it, and if I may say so, have done a far better job than I would have done. Regards, Flaming Ferrari (talk) 06:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Carmarthen by-election, 1928
Hi Graham

I have just created an article on the Carmarthen by-election, 1928. Since I don't have access to newspaper archives, I had intended it to be a rather stubby article, but then I found that the fine article which you had written on William Nathaniel Jones included a lot more detail, so I recycled much of your material in to the article on the by-election.

This has led to some duplication between the two articles, and I think that it would be appropriate to trim some of the by-election material from the article on Jones, so that it is centralised in the most logical place. Not having direct access to the source, I was reluctant to do so myself, so I may I suggest that you might do some of the relevant editing?

BTW, as you may have noticed, I have done a little trimming of categories on some of the articles which you created. Per WP:SUBCAT, an article in not usually categorised in both a category and its sub-category, so I have removed Category:Liberal Party politicians (UK) from articles which are also in its sub-category Category:Liberal MPs (UK).

Hope this helps! -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Victor Harold Finney
I have nominated Victor Harold Finney, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Victor Harold Finney. 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. A v  N  10:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ignore the guy above; thanks for this fantastic article :). Considered sending it to WP:DYK? Ironholds (talk) 13:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've written quite a few articles on MPs myself, yes. For future reference, feel free to ignore this sort of thing; MPs are inherently notable per WP guidelines. Ironholds (talk) 17:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yea, sure. Ignore me if you like. It was my mistake. I didn't have access to the sources as they are books, that's why I nominated it for a deletion discussion. So the question wasn't whether MPs are inherently notable, it was also about the authenticity of the article itself. I prefer to err on the side of caution.
 * Good job with the bad faith assumptions, Ironholds. A  v  N  04:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

James Duckworth
Hi Graham

If you have a little spare time, please could you consider casting your eagle eye over my latest article, Rochdale's Liberal grocery magnate James Duckworth? I have left a few notes at Talk:James Duckworth.

I know that you have access to some national papers, so if you had the time and inclination, you might be able to tidy this one up a bit and maybe expand it ... but if you have other priorities, sorry for disturbing you! -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Herbert Willison
Nice to see you at it again with the excellent articles. If you have time I'm trying to get this up to Featured status so it matches its sister article; I'd be grateful for anything you could do in regards to the "rationale/reason" column. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 15:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks :). And if you live near London, this is always fun. Ironholds (talk) 15:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, hope to see you at some point in the future. We mad a manchester meet a month or so back - I'm sure we'll organise one more local to you at some point. Ironholds (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Sir Joseph Walton, 1st Baronet
Hi Graham, per Layout the segmentation of articles by lines generated by a is not used anymore and should be avoided, I therefore have reverted you. Best wishes. Phoe  talk   18:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sir Francis Evans, 1st Baronet
Hi Graham, hope you are keeping well.

I just created a rather stubby article on the Liberal MP Sir Francis Evans, 1st Baronet. However, I noticed that you had recebtky created another of your fine articles on by-elections: Maidstone by-election, 1901, which Evans won.

So I just thought I's suggest that maybe the Evans article might be one you would like to expand, if you have the time and/or inclination? -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message. I have expanded the Evans article. Hope it's OK. G --Graham Lippiatt (talk) 23:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * As always with your work, it's great. Well done!  -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

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, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes 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. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

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) 01:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

George Nicholls (MP)
Hi Graham

I have just created a rather brief article on the Lib-Lab MP George Nicholls (MP). If found a few snippets which suggest that as well as a significant role in agricultural policy, he seems to have to have been a significant player in 1920s Liberalism and possibly a self-made-man story. It's a rather poor little piece at the mo, and I have left some notes on the talk page.

I dunno if you have access to any sources which might help (I found that the Times archive is fairly useless on him), but if this one interests you I think that there is scope for a good article on him.

Best wishes, -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:51, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for John Lawson Walton
The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited George Heynes Radford, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English (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) 11:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13
Hi. When you recently edited Dewsbury by-election, 1902, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Labour Representation Committee and Temperance (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) 11:50, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Albert Bright, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Montgomery and Statesman (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) 12:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Westbury by-election, 1906, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Fuller (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) 11:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edinburgh South by-election, 1899, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morningside (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) 11:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joseph Johnstone, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cabinet, Salford and George Barnes (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) 11:26, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=569727262 your edit] to Colne Valley by-election, 1916 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"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) 14:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * By-elections to the United Kingdom Parliament in Yorkshire and the Humber constituencies]]

Disambiguation link notification for April 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Camberwell North West by-election, 1920, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Franchise (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) 08:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Article for deletion notification
I have nominated an articles that you've created, Saffron Walden by-election, 1915 and Westbury by-election, 1906 for deletion with a number of other by-election articles as they are uncontested ministerial by-elections with no change in party or member or any notable effort to find an opponent. The deeltion discussion is at Articles for deletion/Durham City by-election, January 1871. JASpencer (talk) 18:23, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Ivor Davies for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ivor Davies 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/Ivor Davies 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 notice from the top of the article. Uhooep (talk) 04:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Independent Liberal Party (UK, 1918) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Independent Liberal Party (UK, 1918) 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/Independent Liberal Party (UK, 1918) 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 notice from the top of the article.Graemp (talk) 13:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)