User talk:Keith D/Archive 18

Ofsted
Why would the move of Ofsted be controversial? Fmph (talk) 13:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought that it may be controversial as we normally avoid abbreviations and acronyms for titles and use the full name. The article has also been at a full title (though admittedly not this one) since it was created. By using WP:RM it avoids any possibility of edit-warring over the name and gives a wider audience for the move. Keith D (talk) 13:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Have done the formal RM proposal. Now we wait a week. PamD (talk) 14:16, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Pam. Keith D (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

18 in 1 ft
In Template talk:RailGauge etc etc is wrong and is now wrong in all articles where it appears. Compare, using template:convert, 18 in and 457 mm or 457 mm. On the other hand look at 450 mm or 450 mm. So, as it is now, is nonsense. There is a difference of 7 mm involved! Peter Horn User talk 00:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * So you want me to revert the change and set 18" to 457mm and 457mm to 18". Keith D (talk) 00:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC).


 * Indeed, please change it back and create a seperate "RailGauge" template based 450 mm or 450 mm on one hand and 17.72 in or 1 ft on the other hand. That way that which is now lost between blank and blank will show again in all articles where it is used. Remember the difference is 7 mm or a tad more than 1/4 in. Peter Horn User talk 01:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 01:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅ Keith D (talk) 11:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * "Mercy buckets" (A stale Anglo Quebec joke for "Merci beaucoup"). The "Mad RailGauger" Peter Horn User talk 17:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Christmas
Thanks, I shall do the Newsletter. (I'll put a sticky note on the computer screen!!) Happy Christmas to you too.--Harkey (talk) 12:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Tricky
in Template talk:RailGauge
 * vs and 700 mm or 700 mm vs 699 mm or 699 mm. And there still is 2 ft. That difference of 1 mm is a nuisance. Peter Horn User talk 19:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I tried 27+17/32 in to the nearest $1/32$ in as well as 27+9/16 in to the nearest $1/16$ in. The latter gives 700 mm. So I feel that should give $27 9/16$ in or  give 700 mm. And then  should give 699 mm instead, as well as have . Call me "the Mad RailGauger" if you wish. Peter Horn User talk 21:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I think I have sorted this one out now. Keith D (talk) 18:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Those weird Swedish rail gauges
In Template talk:RailGauge, Narrow gauge rail transport and Köping-Uttersberg-Riddarhyttan Railway etc. I see that these are still pending. Peter Horn User talk 20:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keith, And as of today they are still pending, nonetheless thanks for your past hard work. Peter Horn User talk 20:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I know - I am still working on watchlist changes made to articles made while I was away over Christmas. Surprising how much vandalism has not been picked up by others. Keith D (talk) 20:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Think I have picked these up now and added appropriate entries as per the article. Keith D (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, thanks for your hard work. I have updated the articles accordingly. Peter Horn User talk 16:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles concerning Montenegro
Hi Keith, I just want to express my great disappointment with Wikipedia for letting Serbian nationalists to do whatever they want and writing lies about Montenegro.We,Montenegrins,are not able to defend only because we are inferior in numbers to Serbs(most of them from Serbia to be precise).For example-article "Serb Clans",I may suggest moving of this article,but I will surely be voted over by superior numbers of Serbs that write on Wikipedia.I was led to believe that Wikipedia is built on principles of neutrality and fairness and yet it seems that it is letting ultranationalist Serbs to spread their propaganda unopposed. Have a nice holydays! Petar from Montenegro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.155.24.53 (talk) 02:32, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - January 2010
Delivered January 2010 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page. → Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 14:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to 2010
Welcome back and a Happy New Year. As you will see, I tried for an article improvement initiative in the newsletter. No activity as yet but it's a funny time of year!! I'll try to do a bit of work on the articles myself during the month. (No doubt you will be busy on "catch up" stuff for a while.) I chose the two articles for improvement as being non-controversial.--Harkey (talk) 09:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi again and Happy New Year. I did spot the newsletter and had a quick read, think it is a good idea but wonder if this will produce any activity. I think that the Ripon one would be a good one to get to GA, there was problems over parts of this one by a user who was banned for a year that re-wrote large sections when they got back so may need a lot of validation, especially the references. The Yorkshire and Humber one appears to be sprawling on the economy section with lots of firms added just before Christmas, saw that one yesterday on the watchlist. Will not be back to normal for a few days still looking over watchlist changes got to 21 December at the moment. Keith D (talk) 10:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:Lincolnshire Problem
Hi, WikiProjet Lincolnshire appears to have caused some controversy over at Talk:Lincoln and Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Council, the disambig article Lincoln had been rated (for us) as a Disambig article and High importance. User:purplebackpack89 has now taken the arguement as to whether WPs should tag Disambig pages or not to the WP Council. Ours is the prime example and dispite User:Xeno clarifying the matter by saying that it is up to the WikiProject as to whether they decide to tag articles or not. I thought I'd tell and wondered what your opinion is. 95jb14 (talk) 20:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC).


 * I cannot see a problem with tagging dab pages by projects as it is a way of keeping an eye on them as they are relevant to the project. Sorry but I am out of touch with current things as still working through changes made over Christmas break and Lincoln has not popped up as yet. Keith D (talk) 20:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Independent Schools Inspectorate
Hi ! This article which you have edited or contributed to, concerns an important feature of UK Education. It still needs some urgent  attention. If you can help, please see Talk:Independent Schools Inspectorate  regarding  how it  may  be improved. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 04:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

COTM banner type thing
I've added a COTM box to WPYorks talk page. I've not made it into a template as yet, as I'm not sure whether it needs alteration/improvement etc. or whether the project will "take off" at all. Do the suggested articles need a banner of some sort too?--Harkey (talk) 10:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank looks OK, I tweaked the dates to be both in same format. It may be good to put a box on the article page and then people can see that even if they do not visit the project page. Also gives people a reminder so as not to pick it again. I am still not back up to date on the changes but making progress. Keith D (talk) 10:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I'll find something suitable. (I have a couple of unexpected "free" days. I was going to go to the open day at the Diamond Light Source on Friday but it's been cancelled due to the snow.)--Harkey (talk) 10:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Geographic Location box
Keith, Please could you tell me where I can find "the previous version of the template with the compass in the middle" (following discussion on wp:ukgeog). Thanks. OldSpot61 (talk) 09:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It was called GeoCompass but it got deleted and uses were converted over to use the existing box. Keith D (talk) 11:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Jonathan Howson
The information on Soccerbase is incorrect. He only scored 2 league goals in 2007/2008.

It awards the goal against Bristol Rovers in December 2007 to him, although this was actually credited as an Elliott own goal.

Source - http://www.leedsunited.com/matchreport/leeds-1-bristol-rovers-0-20071222_2247678_38719

138.37.248.103 (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks - probably need an editor note in the article for others to see and not make same change. Keith D (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have extended note & copied down to table at end of article. Keith D (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Nun Monkton
I see that you are a previous editor of this page, so please could you kindly take a glance at it, as it has just been considerably expanded by someone who clearly knows his/her history, but has not linked any of the new text with any references: i.e. it's possibly the ref at the bottom but no page numbers are listed. Also, he/she has included a some (copied and pasted??) peacock words, e.g. "finest" and "impressive" but has not said whether these are quotations (from what?) I hesitate to simply undo it all, as it looks like proper history, so that's why I'm asking for advice. I have not asked this editor any questions as he/she does not appear to use his/her talk page. Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It seems like the material is valid but needs referencing may be a prod with a tag may get the user's attention, best one I can find is More footnotes. I would still drop a note on to the users talk page even if they do not communicate at least they should see the message. Keith D (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Keith D. I sent him a note here and tagged the page as advised.--Storye book (talk) 22:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Sit back and see what happens, looks like they are an infrequent editor. Keith D (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Transferring image files to Commons
Thank you for the heads up with the tags for copy to Commons on the following: File:Tees crossing at Cliffe 1.jpg File:George Hotel at Cliffe 2.jpg File:Tees Crossing at Cliffe 2.jpg File:George Hotel at Cliffe 1.jpg I have now corrected the licences, which gives a link for quick transfer, but I cannot make it work. I followed the instructions but the system can't identify me. Then it said the file transfer was stopped for debugging. Is there a solution, or should I ask you to just delete the files and I'll upload them again from scratch to Commons?--Storye book (talk) 17:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Unsure on that one, I have been tagging images but not done any transfers though was thinking may be I should as there is a large backlog. I just tried to create an account and cannot get past the "Toolserver User Screening Control" screen to verify me. Keith D (talk) 19:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for trying, Keith D. Would you like to delete them then?  It would be less trouble from my POV to just re-upload them from scratch to Commons, especially now that I've just learnt to use the Geograph licence - then they'll be on the Commonscat link from the article page.  I've dumped those four off the article page, anyway, as one of them suddenly stopped showing on the page. Cheers.--Storye book (talk) 21:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

A more efficient tool for transferring images and other media to commons would be very useful. Something where you input the name. And an automated license check is done, and if it succeeds the mediafile is transferred. also a multiple file upload tool would be useful. However that is of less importance (I think) Electron9 (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have deleted the 4 images so you can re-upload them to Commons. If you go to the image on Geograph and click on the link under the image "Find out how to reuse this Image" and scrolldown to "Wikipedia Template for image page." Copy the template from the box to the upload form on Commons and that will fill out the detail, licence and add the geo-location details for the image. Saves a lot of typing. Keith D (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Thank you very much, Keith D.--Storye book (talk) 21:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. File:Cliffe Tees Crossing 1.jpg | File:Cliffe George Hotel 2.jpg | File:Cliffe Tees Crossing 2.jpg | File:Cliffe GeorgeHotel 1.jpg. Yes it's much quicker that way - although it nearly caught me out before I realised you have to add the licence manually.--Storye book (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The systematic bias mob on the move ;-)
I moved "EMI" to "EMI Group Ltd" see my talk page my edits and a quite similar case with "CFL" which you corrected in 15 April 2008. I consider this a systematic bias, and rather deal with more productive matters than this. Electron9 (talk) 18:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Northamptonshirre, Worcestershierre, Warwickshierre, and Everyshierre
Hello ! A non-British user seems to be attempting to  suggest that the Brits are not  pronouncing  their own British  place names  correctly,  and appears to  believe that  it  is a policy of Wikipedia to  instruct  the Brits, through  the use of the IPA, how British English  should be pronounced. He/she also seems to be of the  opinion that it is Wikipedia policy to regard British English by default as a rhotic  language, which it is not. Some British Wikipedians are trying to avoid an edit conflict and have requested my support. I have added my comments to the debate the non-British user has  has started in  defence of his/her multiple, WP:BOLD? changes to IPA pronunciations of British place names. As a professional linguist I accord every version  of English  its own particular merits and  my  position here strictly concerns the way in  which  the IPA is interpreted and applied in the Wikipedia, and how the current policy may need to be changed through a truly representative consensus. If you would like to  help  resolve this issue,  please see User talk:Kudpung and User talk:Lfh to  get  the background. Maybe you could then chime in with your views on the subject at Wikipedia talk:IPA for English. Thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 0a73352dd809a036c5a9dacc7746dca4
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

The Royal York Hotel
This is a profoundly unsatisfactory article. It has two short paras relating to the article title (nabbed from here and then a section on the first and second stations and the first and second hotels (mostly taken from what I added to York railway station), then another section on the second hotel taken from a linked page on the above History of York site (and there's no external link to that site).

So, some questions: is an article that's just about the Royal York Hotel (and doesn't include any of the other gunge) feasible? I could add some stuff about the architecture, but how notable is it? Or should there be an article entitled something like York station hotels? Maybe there should be an article about the Old (i.e. first permanent) station which would include the first real station hotel (i.e. the second one)? (There are plenty of WP articles about defunct stations.) Any thoughts? --GuillaumeTell 21:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The building is a Grade II listed building so may possibly sustain a separate article, but at the moment it looks a bit of a mess. Your second suggestion about including it into station articles seems the best way to go at the moment as the station articles are usually small and could do with some more material in them. Keith D (talk) 22:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

RBF Morph
Thank you for your advise. But I have already asked external contributions and technical opinions without results. It seems that there are not so many wikipedian expert in Radial Basis Functions... and seems that new contributors are not welcomed. So I'm trying to undelete RBF Morph and I'm open to substantially improve RBF theory present in Wikipedia. If I will fail in do that I will leave the community as other colleagues at the University frustrated by to much complicated procedures. MEB71 (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello. Considering the debate for the deletion review I think that your advice is good. MEB71 (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

tweeting vandals
I came across tweets asking people to vandalize wikipedia(Northern Rail).thanks for protection. .See tweets 40 minutes prior to this message. --ADI4094 12:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Making a new user account
Hey Keith.

I was wondering if you could help me understand something. I'd like to create a new Wikipedia account to essentially 'Start again' and take on a new name. I was wondering how I would go about doing this? I don't want to be labelled as creating a sockpuppet account. What I know so far is that I would have to stop using Neutralle alltogether, and place a 'Retired' tag on the userpage. I also know that I would have to let people know that I used to use Neutralle so that I don't end up deceiving anyone. Is this all I need to do?

Also when i'd make the new account, would you be able transfer my rollback privileges to my new account? I know you need to meet certain requirements for those privileges but editing history by Neutralle would be enough? Thanks for the help  Neu  tralle


 * You can request a name change at Changing username if it is just a name change that is required. Keith D (talk) 14:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh I didn't know about that. Cheers!  Neu  tralle  14:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Going Dutch
Hello Keith, I left a note at the bottom of Template talk:RailGauge. I hope that it answers your question. Our home computer is on the fritz, so I'm using one at the public library. Peter Horn User talk 17:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

West Riding of Yorkshire
Hi Keith,

I notice that you have undone my revisions of this article by reverting the tenses back to the past. This is misleading because it implies that the West Riding of Yorkshire was abolished at the same time as the West Riding County Council. Parliamentary statements have made it quite clear that this is not the case and that the cultural status of the historic ridings and counties continues.

88.107.31.236 (talk) 22:32, 16 January 2010 (UTC) Richard L., 16 January 2010.


 * As is common practice on wiki the former counties are refereed to in the past tense they are not current counties and have been superseded. Keith D (talk) 22:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Yorkshire and its ridings are not "former counties" - you appear to be confusing historic counties with administrative counties. It is the administrative counties (such as the West Riding of Yorkshire County Council) which are no longer current and "have been superceded". Can you reference any credible source which states that the historic counties were ever abolished? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.31.236 (talk) 22:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It is the practice here to indicate that the Ridings together with all of the former counties, such as Yorkshire, are in the past tense. We use the current structure of local government mainly based on ceremonial counties when referring to places and locations.Keith D (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

If Yorkshire is a "former county" then how come the Flag Institute granted the registration of a Yorkshire flag only 18 months ago? 88.107.31.236 (talk) 23:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Hull Brewery
Hi Keith

If and when you have the time, would you mind proofing/reviewing/editing User:Pablo X/Hull Brewery? My problem is that I'm a long way away from Hull and so access to sources is limited.

Cheers  pablo hablo. 11:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi had a look and it looks OK to me. The only question I have is in the section "The Hull Brewery Company Limited" which starts with "Gleadow, Dibb and Co. Ltd." but there is no mention of it becoming a limited company and acquiring the Ltd. suffix.


 * In the previous section on the rail journey it may be worth mentioning that the train was destined for Hull with a link to the Yorkshire Coast Line article to give people some idea of the geography of the route. If you are interested there is a photo that can be used of the Maltings which is the site of the former brewery in Silvester Street. Keith D (talk) 18:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It's gone live now.  pablo hablo. 19:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Old Goole Mill
It was one that was not mentioned in the sources I used. Now added to the list. Mjroots (talk) 06:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I was thinking that may be it had some other name. Keith D (talk) 12:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Red Right Hand
I notice that you flagged Red Right Hand as part of Project Yorkshire on 28 August 2009; what's the connection? 203.122.249.19 (talk) 10:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The connection is the Arctic Monkeys who are from Sheffield in South Yorkshire. It was tagged as it is in the category:Arctic Monkeys songs probably a tentative connection as it was only covered by the group. Keith D (talk) 12:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hull Brewery DYK
I've dipped a toe in the convoluted DYK process. The only hook I can think of for the Hull Brewery article is the bit about Dibb dying on a train but remaining upright in his seat (very disciplined those Victorians!), but I'm not convinced it's really suitable, what do you think? It's a damn shame I don't have an online citation for the bit about the German bombers using the brewery chimneys as a landmark, that would be ideal!

PS Did you know that Nick Cave pinched the phrase 'Red Right Hand' from Milton, who swiped it from Horace? pablo hablo. 23:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have not heard about the origins of the phrase 'Red Right Hand'. My thoughts were the same as yours on the death being the hook for Hull Brewery article. I have had a look for the chimney part but like you drawn a blank. Keith D (talk) 23:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Matthew Kilgallon - protection needed - edit war/ vandalism
Any chance you can add a protection template to this article. I have restored most of the deleted content prior to today's spat over his transfer to Sunderland. Steve-Ho (talk) 23:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Steve-Ho (talk) 23:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem just looking him over. Keith D (talk) 23:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Wharncliffe Woodmoor Colliery
Hi Keith Thanks for occasionally popping onto the article Wharncliffe Woodmoor Colliery. I am new to Wikipedia therefore just getting used to it. I am trying to follow all the ‘rules’ etc so if I have done something note quite right please let me know. The article is a work in progress due to my secular work, most of the research I have done is off-line e.g. library/museums etc. so finding time to give the subject justice is hard. Anyway thanks again….Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by Photofanny (talk • contribs) 20:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem, it takes time for people to get used to the way things are done and to get used to the house style for articles. If there is any thing I can help with then let me know and I will see what I can do. The article is on the watchlist so I know when changes are made to it. Keith D (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Naming conflict on the Gulf Cup of Nations page
There has been an ongoing conflict of weather the "Gulf Cup of Nations" should be renamed "The Arabian Gulf Cup", do to the competition being officially named that by the organizers. I am not supporting the page being re-named, but I just want to include a section on the page that stats that the competition is officially named as "The Arabian Gulf Cup", and that there is conflict with that name, thus many know the competition simply as "The Gulf Cup of Nations".

I have done what I explained, and gave a number of citations to explain what I have written, but the User:Kurdo777 has been one who has thoroughly fought to hide the official name of the competition, and has erased it numerous times.

My edit:

His claim that my edit did not meet Wikipedia requirements: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salalah4life (talk • contribs) 07:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)