User talk:J3Mrs/Archive 3

Listed buildings in Rivington
Excellent work. Ready for GA list in my view. You should nominate it. Dr. Blofeld      White cat 00:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * A very good piece of work and nearly IMO ready for recognition. But it's a list-article rather than an article and should be submitted as a list.  The problem is that there is no such thing as a "Good List"; you'll have to go for Featured List, and that would be appropriate.  I've had a bit of success in that area and would like to make some early suggestions for improvement.  First the dates don't sort properly.  I can see that you have put a lot of effort into this, but have a look and you'll see what I mean.  A minor point: you need to add a few non-breaking spaces to avoid splitting at the ends of lines; examples are Grade X, Xth century, and everywhere a word follows a number such as 21 listed buildings.  I have suffered (enjoyed) some comments about the sort of references you have used.  You might be interested to read the debate at Featured list candidates/Historic Chapels Trust/archive1.  Images of England is now out of date and is not being updated; Listed Buildings Online contains advertising material (not really approved); so I've switched everything to Heritage Gateway, which has up to date info (the same as LBO) and no adverts.  It's not easy to search until you're used to it.  If you have the ref nos (IoE), go into Advanced Search (bottom of the opening page), then hit the Resources button in the menu on the left, then put the ref no in the box at the bottom, then click on the Listed Buildings Online link (there should be one result, the one you want), then use that URL.  For the publisher etc you can copy what I've done in Historic Chapels Trust (as I was advised here).  Sounds complicated but once you are in the rhythm it works well.  Good luck; let me know if you nominate it.  I have found the reviewers on FLC kinder than those on FAC! (If you want to reply I shall be watching this page.) --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * (Copied from User talk:Peter I. Vardy to keep the discussion in one place) Hi again, thanks for your comments and advice, you're very kind, but if I ever submit it anywhere but DYK then I have a fairly steep learning curve ahead. I'm also a complete wimp when it comes to submitting anything for scrutiny, the result of a very unhealthy working environment that I put up with for years.
 * I will look at the article and see what I can do but I have no idea how to make the dates sort, perhaps I should just make the table unsortable. As far as the refs go I have read the debate you pointed me to, and well, some of the refs I have used I simply can't find on Images of England or Heritage Gateway, yet. (Does the ref have to be so long?) This will take much longer than you might imagine. : -) --J3Mrs (talk) 20:01, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I can't quite make sense of this, from the lead: "Its barn and the barn at Great House Farm were renovated, converted, and used for catering for the early tourist industry by Jonathan Simpson for William Lever in 1904, a function they retain today." Did Jonathan Simpson use the buildings for the tourist industry, or did he do the renovation and conversion? Malleus Fatuorum 00:51, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for looking at it. Jonathan Simpson was the architect, I'll change it. :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 09:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm prepared to have a go at making the dates sort properly and doing the refs (the latter is not much more than copy and paste + add a bit). Assuming your permission, I will copy the list and refs (not the lead) into one of my sandboxes.  If you like what I have done, it can be copied back into the list.  Hope that's OK — if not, just let me know.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 06:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, that really is a generous offer Peter, it would be churlish to refuse.:-) I promise I will look at what you do and learn from it!--J3Mrs (talk) 09:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I've had a go and the result is in User:Peter I. Vardy/sandbox3, with an explanation of what I've done. I haven't done any copyediting (not my forte).  If you like it, just copy it across and overwrite the relevant bits.  Cheers.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That really was quick! I have had a very brief look and it's great. I will copy it. After that I'm out for the afternoon. I'll get back to it later. Many thanks.--J3Mrs (talk) 10:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm really impressed with the article now both in terms of MF's superior English and Peter's amazing sortable list. I can't thank you enough. I think I even understand what I have to do to make it sort now. I might even try another one day.--J3Mrs (talk) 15:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * When I can figure out how to do it, should I nominate it? If I do I hope I survive the personal trauma it will undoubtedly cause me! I really, really am a complete wimp when it comes to scrutiny. And I hope you'll share the credit.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

(outdent)Yes. The instructions at Featured list candidates are fairly straightforward. When you do, let me know and I will watch its progress. The credit will be yours; but I will make a comment about the degree of my involvement when I add my support. Cheers.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I did it! I thought I'd do it now as I'm really good at procrastination. I hope I did it correctly, and appreciate your encouragement. I have already broken out into a cold sweat! --J3Mrs (talk) 09:37, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Great! I'm pleased to see that Bencherlite has taken an interest so quickly.  He is an expert on lists (among other things) and a fine collaborator.  This sort of thing is one of the "good" aspects of going for featured.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Belle Vue
There are so many aspects to this story, it's hard to organise them all. You've picked up on one of the most important I think, that Belle Vue was initially a venue for the middle-classes, but quite soon tried to attract the workers as well, especially after the racecourse was built and trains began to arrive. I've come across something that I think is quite bizarre; the outdoor wooden dancing platforms are bizarre enough, but people were outraged because men often danced on them with other men, as contemporary photographs clearly show. That's full-clinch dancing I'm talking about. Malleus Fatuorum 01:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Someone's been busy! When you mentioned the article I thought copyedit, this is something else. Manchester men, what are they like? No busom to busom there then? I like what you've done so far, not so much a list and not so bitty. Are you going to move some more, out of WWII for instance? I've seen the elephant & toll bridge painting in Manchester Art Gallery, it was featured in a rather nice exhibition called "Manchester Attitude" or something similar, a couple of years ago now. I'll snip away but leave the moving to you as you appear to have a plan.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't think there would be so much to do either. My plan, such as it is, is simply to group the material by theme, rather than chronologically. So the zoo, the amusement park, exhibition halls, firework displays and so on. I haven't quite decided how to tackle that WWII section yet. A lot of it's obviously relevant to the zoo, and should probably be moved there. Hopefully as the article develops there will be natural places to put all the rest of that material as well, so the section can go. It sticks out like a sore thumb right now, and makes it look like nothing happened between the end of the war and the Forte takeover. Malleus Fatuorum 14:49, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * By the way I think the elephant poster shows the Bobs roller coaster and must be post 1925 not late 19th C. Just a thought.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you must be right, that's got to be the Bobs'. As we can't date the image, it'll have to go I suppose. Malleus Fatuorum 15:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It could go in the Funfair where the Bobs is mentioned as the Water Chute is obviously from later. It would be a shame to lose it.--J3Mrs (talk) 15:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * How about moving the Funfair section nearer to the end as its closure was the end really? I think the poster is Lil and Phil. --J3Mrs (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I think trying to fit into the existing headings is a bit of a problem, maybe some need renaming so other stuff can be incorporated if you see what I meam. Perhaps I should stop thinking and make some tea.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * There does need to be some rejigging done, I agree, as there's still a lot of stuff missing. Like the exhibition halls and what went on in there, the restaurants, concerts, the dancing I mentioned, the recurring fires and vandalism during the later years, the racecourse and Jennison's efforts to attract the working class. The problem with the image is that if we can't date it, then we can't make a credible claim for its copyright having expired. I've found one of the Speedway stadium though, on geograph would you believe, so I'll stick that in. Malleus Fatuorum 17:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * 1933! --J3Mrs (talk) 17:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm starting to feel a lot happier about the structure of this article now. It's getting easier to see where to slot new material in, and what's missing. Don't worry about being dragged in front of the FAC firing squad any time soon though, we're quite a way from that yet. Besides, I'll be there to hold your hand, I've faced them before. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 19:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The structure is much, much better and the text is definately more readable. My mother told me today that I went there by train but though she at past 90 can remember I can only remember the elephant. I have also left my specs somewhere, so I'm struggling this evening. The whole of Chapter 11 in the Mackenzie book is very interesting and it analyses the social aspects, the evolution from pleasure gardens to pleasure grounds to theme park. The Halle orchestra played in the same place as the circus was held but I don't remember where I saw that. I suppose you do realise I have added very little to this article, only taken away.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I rather like this quote from Mackenzie but have no idea where it would fit.

"The pleasure grounds provide a kaleidoscopic range of entertainments:from speedway and greyhound racing to Fascist and Communist Rallies; from zoological gardens and museums to the latest farground rides from America; from jazz and brass bands to religious meetings of every denomination." --J3Mrs (talk) 19:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have rather a Zen view, less is more, but the social aspects you mention definitely need to be covered. That's a good quote, I'm sure we can find a place for it. What I'm generally beginning to find difficult is to know when enough is enough for GA. Pretty much everything I've worked on recently has gone straight to FAC, in at least one case because I got bored waiting for a GA reviewer to turn up. This is such a wide-ranging subject though that it's bound to be tough – you haven't mentioned this, why have you included that? Maybe it was a mistake even to attempt it, when the Manchester Ship Canal is still crying out to be finished off. Malleus Fatuorum 20:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I know what you mean re "less is more", it's a battle I've had re Rivington. In that case I think the quote doesn't need to be in as it only introduces topics not already covered. It is a wide ranging subject but the coverage now is much clearer in the article. You can finish the Ship Canal next!--J3Mrs (talk) 08:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm havering about whether or not to include an account of the greyhound racing stadium, as it wasn't actually ever owned by Belle Vue; it was just built on some land Belle Vue leased out to a third party. A bit like the hokey cokey, I've had it in, then out. On balance I think I'm inclined to say just a little about it, if only because many will associate Belle Vue with greyhound racing and may wonder why there's nothing on it. Do you have a view? Malleus Fatuorum 20:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It was the first purpose built stadium but I didn't realise it wasn't part of the set up. but it's up to you. I really like what you've done today:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 21:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It was on the Belle Vue site, so I'm slowly persuading myself that it's got to be included, no matter who owned it. I'm feeling a lot happier about the structure now; there's still a few gaps to fill, and some of it doesn't make sense, like Gerald Iles negotiating with the Tower Circus when he would still have been a schoolboy, but I'm beginning to think we're getting close now, to GA at least. Malleus Fatuorum 21:24, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought John Henry Iles was Belle Vue Company Chairman 1928 - 1937, not Gerald.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * This makes it clearer --J3Mrs (talk) 21:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure you're sick to death of me mithering you about Belle Vue, but what's become apparent to me is that it's a pretty big topic, and entire articles could be be written about the amusement park, the firework displays, and God knows what else. Anyway, at least for the moment I've done what I can with it, so after I've rewritten the lead (later this evening with luck and a fair wind) I'm going to nominate it at GAN. Naturally, if it doesn't end up being listed, then I'll be blaming you. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 18:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You come pretty low down in the mithering stakes. I'd like to have done more than the pruning but without books it's not possible. I hope my bits and pieces were useful though. I think you've really transformed it over the week.Are you still starting new articles? There's enough to start Gerald Iles in his obituary in the Independent..--J3Mrs (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am. My goal is to create at least 75 new articles (think I'm up to about 50 now), so that I can legitimately refuse the whatever it's called "right" that means your articles don't have to be approved by whichever kiddie happens to turn up on the new pages patrol. Malleus Fatuorum 18:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * PS. I was rather surprised to see that Gerald Iles didn't have an article. So much to do, so little time. Malleus Fatuorum 18:56, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Bugger GAN, the list is endless. I say we throw this to the wolves at FAC after a bit of polishing over the next few days. Are you with me or agin me? Malleus Fatuorum 22:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I knew this is where you were heading all along, because, in my very humble opinion (as a mere woman), it was ready for GAN days ago and I can read minds. Do it, but you do know it's really your article, I only pruned, you wrote it. :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 22:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You're right, we could have gone to GAN days ago, but where's the fun in that? I didn't write this article though, it was written by a fallen comrade, another victim of the civility police; all I did was to move a few commas around. You and I will do this together or we won't do it at all. Best get lots of cake in, and perhaps some wine, as you'll be at FAC in a few days. Malleus Fatuorum 23:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Reading that again, it looked some kind of a threat, which I surely didn't mean it to be. I'm not sure how Belle Vue will fare, but I'm sure that it will be improved by inviting wikipedia's best editors to have a look at it. Malleus Fatuorum 23:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Threat, what threat? Are you getting touchy in your old age? In spite of avoiding stress, which I'm not too good at, I do have a Lancastrian thick skin and have been expecting this all week. I'm not sure I'll be much/any use but if you must, you must. I hope the fallen comrade is reading it.--J3Mrs (talk) 23:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I hope so too. Malleus Fatuorum 23:40, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The Blackshirts at Belle Vue  I still like this quote, I got the author wrong it's from Pussard. "The pleasure grounds provide a kaleidoscopic range of entertainments: from speedway and greyhound racing to Fascist and Communist Rallies; from zoological gardens and museums to the latest fairground rides from America; from jazz and brass bands to religious meetings of every denomination." Something to consider maybe.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * PS I didn't know my articles had to be approved, I must remove the blinkers.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of Belle Vue's FAC earlier. I'm quietly optimistic now that with three supports and no outstanding opposes it may be just about all over bar the shouting. I'm not going anywhere – that would give far too much pleasure to far too many people – I'm just cutting back and focusing more on the things that I want to do, so if anything serious does crop up we can hopefully handle it between us. Malleus Fatuorum 20:18, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Glad you're staying, and doing what you want to do and I look forward to reading it. I'll be happy to do some pruning for you anytime.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Brontë
Hi! You may  be right  to  be cautious about  the number of periodicals read by  the Bronte girls. As you know, i  translated this article from  French. In French  the word for  newspaper and magazine is the same: journal. --Kudpung (talk) 15:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for the work you have done on the Bank Hall page as i have been waiting for someone to read through it for some time now and help with bringing it upto a noteable wikipedia standard. Seen as I have put so much information into the page and when it was knocked back for not being at a standard to pass as a good article, due to the way things have been worded. I really wopuld like to get this article as i have said before to a decent standard and level of Good Article status and maybe featured article status one day? Many thanks again Bankhallbretherton (talk) 21:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

The time has come, the walrus said ...
Malleus Fatuorum 15:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * So I see. I have the wine, but no cake!.--J3Mrs (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I suspect that there will be some image issues cropping up, as I'm by no means convinced about some of the licensing, but we'll see. I think we've done a decent job of this, considering all the aspects that needed to be considered, so we'll see what others think. So long as we don't get an initial flurry of opposes I think we might be alright. Malleus Fatuorum 16:07, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * If I put on weight, I'll blame you.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Seems like I was right about the images. God, how I hate having to deal with image licensing issues on wikipedia! Malleus Fatuorum 17:06, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

The image issues are all sorted now, thank God. I'm not going to be around much, if at all, over the weekend, so don't think that I've abandoned you to your fate at FAC. If anything important crops up, it'll have to wait. Malleus Fatuorum 21:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Whatever you're doing, enjoy it:-) Told you I wouldn't be much use :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 21:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It's only just started. When the comments start rolling in I expect that there will be plenty for us both to do. Malleus Fatuorum 21:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, that was about as painless an FAC as I've ever had. Well done to us! Malleus Fatuorum 19:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Well done to you mostly, but I will pour a(nother) glass of red stuff to celebrate.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's always more enjoyable, for me anyway, to work on an article with a like-minded editor, and although you're reluctant to take much of the credit it was your pruning that got me off my arse to try and put this one to bed. As a side benefit you've now seen at first-hand that FAC is nothing to be affeared of if you go there properly prepared. All good really. I'm thinking that the Manchester Ship Canal and Trafford Park ought to be next. It's scandalous really the the ship canal isn't even a GA. Then of course there's the man who was hanged twice but survived, the Green children of Woolpit, the Paisley witches ... I seem to have started more than I've finished. Malleus Fatuorum 20:12, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Protecting pages
I've requested Rivington and Manor of Rivington to be semi-protected at Requests for page protection. Nearly every day an IP editor (I'm sure you know who it is) pushes their POV, poorly written sentences, or badly referenced sources. Early this month I found that by the time I'd undone or corrected those articles I either didn't have time to edit what I meant to do or become discouraged and gave up. I'm wondering if you have the same problem? – HLE (talk) 14:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Rudeness in edit notes
you edited out the latter part of a quote for your own reasons and stated 'removed irrelevant detail added by editor playing games' in edit comment in relation to my edit. What is Playing Games in editing an article to ensure its correct. Why be so rude on your edits. It is not what I expect of an editor at wikipedia --PL.-Snr (talk) 16:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I find it rude when certain registered users do not log-in and edit anonymously, thereby avoid having those edits in their registered username's history.--HLE (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Socketpuppets galour on this talk. Stalking on wikipedia - no wonder people don't sign in --88.104.37.205 (talk) 00:56, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I find it laughable that a user who undid my edit saying, "Source does not support this statement" when it so obviously did, makes any remarks about my edits or me! The edit I made removed stuff that is irrelevant to the Rivington as it introduces trivia. Removing copious amounts of trivia, deciphering ungrammatical stuff in archaic language and now strange legal jargon isn't much fun, but somebody obviously enjoys adding it.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * You have again repeated personal attacks the most recent in an article talk page, I am asking you again to refrain. WP:NPA --PL.-Snr (talk) 20:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * How are you defining "personal attack"? The straightforward truth? Malleus Fatuorum 20:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to resolve
I have a proposal to resolve some recent crossing of swords, its seems that when I make an edit you state its in bad grammar and poor English. I do not claim to be at expert level in English. I do have specialist knoweldge of certain topics, one of which you have recently taken over as main editor, gatekeeper. Rather than have edit conflicts how about we both post a message to the discussion board proposing a series of changes / additions or corrections to the article and then we can both look at these and discuss them. Maybe if I was to post my suggestions there you could enter the parts that seem appropriate to the article with your edits improving grammar and likewise I will know where you are heading with the article and where other editors may also wish to comment on the direction and content of the article. Where my grammar may not have been at best maybe correcting the grammar would be more appropriate than deleting or undoing almost every edit I make. I do think it would be better to stick to talk pages on this subject and open up dialog. --PL.-Snr (talk) 04:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I might take your proposal seriously if you had not already: I have tried in the past to have a dialogue with you, but you have deleted the talk page, and your own talk pages, so I got on with it.--J3Mrs (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * falsely accused me of making personal attacks, which you refuse to substantiate
 * deleted half the talk page discussion including comments from me and other editors
 * made edits since this proposal
 * edited from numerous IP addresses to push your own pov leading to pages being semi-protected at the suggestion of User:HLE
 * accused me of stalking

Reviewer granted
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.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial 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 22:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Chantry Chapel of St Mary the Virgin, Wakefield
Hello! Your submission of Chantry Chapel of St Mary the Virgin, Wakefield 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! NortyNort (Holla) 08:10, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Moved ref. Hope that's ok--J3Mrs (talk) 10:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Chantry Chapel
Most interesting and well done. Thanks for sharing that with me. MarmadukePercy (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Anderton
I can think of no other editor who is best suited to work on the Anderton, Lancashire article, thus I am requesting your assistance. --PL.-Snr (talk) 02:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Why on earth would I want to do that? No thank you, not under any circumstances.--J3Mrs (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Horwich
Thanks you for the edits on the Horwich article, it contains all the main elements and details and reads very well indeed, its a great edit, --PL.-Snr (talk) 02:25, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Great Bolton and Little Bolton
I've created two articles, Great Bolton and Little Bolton, and would be glad if you give them a look over. I'm sure they do need a bit more attention.--HLE (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That's a great idea HLE. My time is limited at the moment but I will look over and add what I can:)--J3Mrs (talk) 12:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I've created another Tonge with Haulgh. There's are only a few redlinks left of the townships in the parish of Bolton le Moors to be created.--HLE (talk) 18:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)


 * So I see, Shall I do Quarlton?--J3Mrs (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Fairly good job! I'm sorry to point something out with the article. There is confusion with the beginning of this reference for Quarlton which does not make sense "QUARLTON, a township, in the chapelry of Turton, parish and union of Bolton, . . . ". Quarlton and Turton were separate townships. And any township with a chapel-of-ease were referred to as chapelries. Also from 1866, all townships automatically became civil parishes, including Quarlton. Quarlton was right next to Turton, and so I would imagine the inhabitants of Quarlton worshipped at the chapel in Turton. I'm sure the authors have made a mistake thinking Quarlton was in the chapelry of Turton. It may be an idea to use this reference instead.--HLE (talk) 19:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, good to see you're on the ball, governance is NOT my thing! PS Don't be sorry!--J3Mrs (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no idea how this edit happened, perhaps we hit the "Save page" button at the same time. Good idea with the Category:History of Bolton, I forgot about that one. Anyway, I'm giving my fingers a rest and am off for a cup of tea.--HLE (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

What a week!
A featured article and now a featured list! Very well done. Malleus Fatuorum 15:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Just learnt about the FL (didn't know you had a FA in process as well). Congratulations on both.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you both, especially as you both deserve a huge share of the credit.--J3Mrs (talk) 18:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you discovered that in Signpost here the list is the Choice of the Week?--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Peter, I only just noticed this, have been on holiday and only chanced on this by accident. Wow! that's really nice ad you did half of it.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for St Peter and St Leonard's Church, Horbury
Is it really called "The Parish Church of the St Peter, Horbury""? Malleus Fatuorum 15:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Senior moment MF, please forgive the elderly and afflicted.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 18:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Very kind of you Nthep, I get help from the very best though:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 10:15, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Brontë
Hi, After having spent  100s of hours translating  this from  the fr.Wiki, we're left  with  an  unwieldly  article that  duplicates much  of the stand-alone main  articles about  the individual members of the family.,  and I  feel  rather responsible for tidying it up. I've had another stab at it today. I notice you have also  had a go  at it and I  would welcome any  further contributions you  can make to  slimming  it  down by  transferring  stuff to  the other articles. I've made a sub talk page 'workshop' page that  can be used to  park  stuff that  is in  progress. If you find anything  I'm  doing  is either confusing or not  quite appropriate, please don't  hesitate to  let  me know, and make your suggestions. --Kudpung (talk) 08:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for helping out with this. You become blinded by it, after working on it for so long before it went live, so fresh eyes are always welcome to hone the text. May be an idea to have a look at the few remaining translator notes, marked {tn}, that need to be handled and the couple of tags that I added where some work is needed. Keith D (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

He's not logging-in, again
He's up to his trick again by not bothering to log-in even though he has have an account. From now on I'll revert any edit he makes until he logs-in.--HLE (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've noticed. I'll also revert the ones that aren't what the ref states. By the way I had a bit of a go at Turton Urban District and Cheetham Close, can you look it over for my inevitable errors :)--J3Mrs (talk) 14:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I had noticed the Turton edits the other day and look fine to me. I've had a glance at the Cheetham Close, and other than that it located on either side of the Lancashire/Greater Manchester boundary, the article seems ok to me.--HLE (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've had a look at the Bolton Street AZ Atlas, map 2, and the stone circles are on the Lancashire boundary.--HLE (talk) 14:28, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Changed it, hope it's better.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Turton Tower
Why waste your time requesting the deletion of Turton Tower? Simply edit the redirect! (And make sure any images are on the Commons!) &mdash; RHaworth 19:14, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Brontë
Hi!

I have just been reading your remarks on the talk page of this article with some interest, as I have been contributing to the French article, and we are currently in the process of reviewing and reshaping it.

So I get you right, could you be more specific with your statement: "The structure of this article is quite bizarre, it jumps about and frequently repeats itself. I really dont think it necessary to have two separate sections on each of the sisters"? I am not quite clear in particular what these "two specific sections on each of the sisters" are referring to.

Just a few examples of what you mean exactly would help a lot. Thanks! --Azurfrog (talk) 12:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry for delay in replying. I think this, (it was previously designed so as to ensure that each section is autonomous), says it all. The article as I copyedited seemed to repeat information from previous sections until it became (to me) totally confusing.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:05, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

History of St Helens;
Thanks for the copy edit help, sometimes you can read through your own stuff a dozen times and still not see it. :) Koncorde (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The article states, "Many of the original parishes, townships and local areas are named after the families that owned the land between the 11th and 18th century." Should it not be as in other areas." Many of the original parishes, townships and local areas gave their name to the families that owned the land between the 11th and 18th century.? I thought placenames were adopted as surnames. I could be wrong and it wouldn't be the first time.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Chicken and egg syndrome. In some cases like the Eccleston family, or the Eltonheads then the family came first. In the case of Hardshaw, Sutton, Windle then the area came first. It could probably do with defining more clearly.Koncorde (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I left it as it was as I wasn't sure. Interesting stuff. I am interested in these unfashionable ex-mining and industrial areas of south Lancashire and its's good to see they haven't been neglected.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well it was neglected until about 4 months ago when I pretty much rebuilt the wiki. The main St Helens article at the moment probably contains the same copy-edit mistakes as the history one (as a lot of text is mirrored until I get chance to begin the process of weeding and expanding the historical wiki. I took a break for a few weeks whilst I was off getting married, so I'll get back to amending some of the inconsistencies. Cheers for raising it as a concern, I'll run through it tonight. Koncorde (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * With regards to my Talk Page convo; the IP edits by Jemmy are something I and Nev1 are monitoring (Jemmy has a well recorded history, and poor reputation, of edits in the Wigan / Lancashire articles). See these Manchester talk archives for details: Archive 1 and Archive 2
 * For the most part his changes are grudge driven against his pet peeve of Wigan being used as a catch-all phrase for the larger Borough (i.e. the sin of conflating the Borough with the Town) and constructive. The St Helens main article Talk Page should show he also has a confused understanding of Town, Township, Borough, Parish, Civil Council, District, Poor Law Union etc and what impact this has on settlements (i.e. their establishment, and abolition) resulting in determined opinion based edits.
 * My favourite edit of his remains his not too strong Latin language skills that originally brought him to my attention. Koncorde (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I just about got through the St Helens History, I hope the main article is a lot leaner:-) I hope you think my edits are constructive, I've learned a lot. If you just got married you ought to take a lot more time off. :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 18:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Constructive and appreciated. I've cut and paste so much information up and down the articles that I was suffering word blindness (cue redundancy, extra capitals, open brackets and whatever else was going on!). It always helps to have a fresh pair of eyes run over your work. I feel better heading back to it now to flesh areas out. Thanks again. Koncorde (talk) 18:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Kirklees Priory
Thanks. Unfortunately the Bot Approvals Group are trying to stop me creating lots of stubs. They are trying to overpower me even though I am a manual editor who edits fast. i have nothing to do with bots so why should I ask for permission to create encyclopedic subject? Starzynka (talk) 10:30, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kirklees Priory
Hello, your nomination of Kirklees Priory at DYK was reviewed and comments provided. --NortyNort (Holla) 12:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Kirklees Priory
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Hamlets
Hello J3Mrs, I've noticed that you have been tagging articles about hamlets e.g. Jagger Green or Thorncliffe, Thorncliffe, Kirkburton with the tag notability; please note that hamlets are notable, and most of the pages that you tagged have one of the List of United Kingdom locations pages linking to them. Thankyou for your time Hamish Griffin (talk) 10:42, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I will continue to tag non notable articles in the area in which I live. You should be aware that List of United Kingdom locations is a wikipedia page and not an independent source of notable places. You really shouldn't believe everything you read here. A mention in an A-Z is hardly a decent reference. I see from your user page you appear to be on a crusade to create these articles with an average of 2 edits per page, it would be far more impressive to see them developed. I live in W Yorks and can assure you of their non notability.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I am using A-Z as a reference because if I didn't, the articles would be tagged as unreferenced, which is why I have added them onto Round Maple. Homan&#39;s Copse (talk) 10:31, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Up your street?
I've just been looking through Women's rights in Saudi Arabia, which is at GAN right now, and I wouldn't know where to start with it. But then I thought of you, a feisty Western woman with a mind of her own. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm up to my eyes in coal mines, old railways and stuff nobody else is interested in and I've decided to fill in some GM blanks on coal mining. I might do "Pit Brow Women" if I can get enough "stuff" but what might I know about women's rights? I've got a GAN too! I'll have a look but I expect to know nothing.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 22:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was being facetious. Don't touch that even with the longest barge pole you can find; it's a nightmare waiting to happen. Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh don't be sorry, I've not even looked, I was just being polite.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Unlike the Saudis I find the idea of a woman interested in railways and coal mining to be quite invigorating ... probably ought to stop there. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The article is worth a read though, particularly for their concept of "guardians" which is ... bizarre? And breast-feeding to make it OK to be in the same space as a male? Who switched the lights out in Saudi Arabia? Malleus Fatuorum 23:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, glad you stopped there. I have just read it and well, words fail me as regards the breast-feeding! And words don't often fail me.--J3Mrs (talk) 11:51, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Astley and Tyldesley Collieries
The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Tyldesley Coal Company
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)