User talk:Keith D/Archive 35

Ash Green School
I notice you have edited the page for this school. May I ask what you removed and why, please? I am the current Vice-Principal and the material removed was seen as very useful by the school Leadership Team. There appears to have been other editing too, so I shall contact those people to see what they did and why.

Kind regards,

Michael Rennie,

07.08.12. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S1ty m (talk • contribs) 14:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I removed an AFD tag from that article that was placed by an IP as that was inappropriate and incomplete. The article has been tagged now as unreferenced as the information that has been added is not supported by any reference apart from the school web site. If you are adding information then you need to support it by references to third party web sites for it to remain. See Citing sources for more information. Keith D (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Hunt not a reliable source
Keith, I am surprised that you do not consider a tweet by Jeremy Hunt calling Shere his home village as not being a reliable source for a change of location. Seems a more reliable source than the Independent who offer no source at at all that he grew up in Godalming! I hope you can enlighten me. Regards, Henry Henry J. Mute (talk) 09:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not think that twitter can be considered a reliable source especially as it is difficult to ascertain exactly who the originator is. It is better to have some published source that can easily be attributed. Use of third party source is also preferable for verification. See WP:RS for more info. Keith D (talk) 09:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Removal of images from Optare Wikipedia page pending appropriate authorisation
Hi Keith D,

I am 'OptareUser' and I'm writing in connection to your comments on the Optare Wikipedia page. I hereby confirm that I have followed your instructions and have emailed the required authorisation statement to the permissions-en@wikimedia.org email address. Will you now reinstate the photographs you removed or should I do so myself? OptareUser (talk) 12:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank. The e-mail will be processed and an ORTS ticket template will be added to the images - once this has been added to the image pages then you are free to reinstate the images on the article. Just keep an eye out to see when the image pages are updated. Keith D (talk) 12:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Football manager list entry
I raised the issue (together with the problems of using this template) here, but got no comment, so assumed there would be no objections if it was removed. To begin with I was just seeing how easy it was to remove it using AWB (turns out it's impossible without also individually editing each template). I don't it's needed to give templates a standard look - using hlist does much of the work. Plus it is being misused in some cases, as editors fail to understand that a separate template was required for the final entry (and I came across at least one example in the few I edited that had two final line templates. Number   5  7  08:09, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2012
Delivered August 2012 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page. → Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 14:39, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Date formats
Is there a way bots can find out the date format?

Or is there a tag that will read a page variable?

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * BOTs could use the Use dmy dates or Use mdy dates templates but because of the way we allow for ISO dates in some fields in references it is not always possible to tell which is use. There has been some discussion on the reflinks tool talk page about using these templates but no real conclusion or action from owner to take it forward. May be if we could get rid of the ISO dates in references then things would be easier. Though I doubt that will hapen as per current discussion at MOS Keith D (talk) 22:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

List of peasant revolts
Can you please take a moment to look at this recent page move? -Ilhador- has now moved the article twice, without discussion. I moved it back to the original title, but cannot do so now because he has created some nonsensical double redirects. The article should be moved back to the original title, then he can make a request at requested moves, and there can be a discussion. He should not move the article again when there is disagreement. --- The Old Jacobite The '45  22:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Cannot see what should be happening here - we have ended up with some circular redirects.
 * Can you say what we should have at Peasant Protests, List of peasant revolts, German Peasants' War and Peasants' War?
 * I have made my best guess at what should happen. Keith D (talk) 23:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you should see here how your friend likes to interact with the others.-Ilhador- (talk) 23:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Peasant Protests seems too vague, and the capital "p" on protests is inappropriate. German Peasants' War seems fine where it is, as it describes a specific set of events.  Likewise, List of peasant revolts seems fine where it is, as the title accurately describes what the article is: a list of revolts over the course of hundreds of years.  Peasants War does not describe one event, as the title seems to imply, as such it seems to me to be an inappropriate title. --- The Old Jacobite The '45  23:47, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like things are OK then after my move as leaves redirects from Peasant Protests and Peasants War to the List of peasant revolts article. Keith D (talk) 23:54, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Two new early Linconshire biographies
Hello, Keith D., and thanks for all of your edits and vandalism protection on the Anne Hutchinson article. I've just created two new articles of early Lincolnshire men, Francis Marbury, the father of Anne, and Edward Hutchinson (mercer), the father-in-law of Anne. There shouldn't be any argument about using British English for these two men who never left England, so I've done my best to get the spellings correct. Would you glance over these two articles at your convenience to make sure I didn't mess up on some usage custom or spelling. I've enjoyed getting to learn more British English doing the Anne Hutchinson article. Many thanks!Sarnold17 (talk) 19:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry for delay in replying but have been away and no BT hopspots in Hull. Francis Marbury looks OK apart from the last reference "Anderson 2003" which has no entry in the Bibliography section for details. Similar problem with Edward Hutchinson (mercer) where "Austin 1887" is missing from Bibliography section. Also "Watkins 1897" appears to have a problem with the linkage as there is an entry in Bibliography section but reference link does not find it. I would also check out the quote "convented for having his hand to the seditious libel, justifying the same, & using conetmptuous speeches" as both convented and conetmptuous are not spelt correctly according to spellchecker. Keith D (talk) 18:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for doing this! I learned that BE uses the spellings judgement (makes perfect sense) and woollen.  Also, thanks for noting the other anomalies.  I've added in the two missing references, and fixed the misspelling of Watkins name in the bibliography.  As to the quote, I've corrected the word contemptuous, but the other word, convented, is commonly used in early New England, and must mean something akin to "convicted," or "accused."  Warmest regards from Baltimore.Sarnold17 (talk) 19:21, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Foston, Lincolnshire
You classified the Foston Lincolnshire site as stub class in 2009. I have since tried to tidy up and introduced some more links etc.

However, I am not sure what one must to to move it up the classifications, could you take a look and enlighten me?


 * Hi, sorry for delay in replying but I have been away and BT do not have any hotspots in the Hull area. Take a look at WikiProject Lincolnshire/Assessment for the process and classification for the Lincolnshire Project. I would think that the classification for the text is now start-class but in order to get start-class it needs references adding to allow verification of the information. See citing sources. Keith D (talk) 17:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Cleveland
Cleveland was not replaced by Stockton-on-Tees, it was replaced by four unitary authorities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.91.211 (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Anne Hutchinson
Hi again, Keith D. You've been in tune with the Hutchinson article for a while, so I will broach the subject with you first. I am interested in putting the article in the hopper for FA status, but this would be my first, and I hate to step into the ring by myself without any support. Would you consider this article to be worthy of such recognition? I've been trying to do all the little wiki things, but is the prose sufficient? Any feedback or ideas from you would be greatly appreciated.Sarnold17 (talk) 17:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, will have a look later, not done too much at FA only minor forays when I spot a problem. Keith D (talk) 18:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Having had a look I think that we need to resolve the spelling issue before any attempt at an FA or it will be pulled apart by the nit pickers. The lead looks a little wordy and could do with tightening to bring it down a little, for example do we really need the distance to Boston in lead.
 * It may be worth going for good article status as a first step or even a peer review to get some other views on it. Keith D (talk) 01:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for taking a look. I was going to use the FA review to resolve the spelling issue, but maybe, as you suggest, it should be done ahead of time.  I don't want to put it up for GA, because I already have four articles clogging the works there presently.  I like the idea of a peer review, so think I'll take that route.  That would provide a lot more confidence taking the article down the FA lane.  As for the lead, I agree, it is a bit wordy.  I will continue to whittle it down.Sarnold17 (talk) 01:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * As an afterthought the single sentence section on Pardon could do with fleshing out or loosing by incorporating into another section. Keith D (talk) 17:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Cosalt
Hi Keith. I'm a shareholder in Cosalt and felt that the page needed updating as the shares are currently suspended. It's my first attempt at something like this, hope I've kept to the rules and that you agree that it's a fair statement of the recent and current situation. Let me know if you think otherwise. Isa, 5/9/11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isalolly (talk • contribs) 18:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably needs trimming and formatting to be more encyclopaedic in nature rather than giving lots of intricate detail in list format. The bolding is something to be avoided and the RNS info is probable better to move to references rather than in the text. Keith D (talk) 18:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Malcolm Harbour
Dear KeithD, Many thanks sorting out our recent edit, best wishes RCHardign (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Non-breaking spaces
Hello, thanks for updating the Hannah Cockroft page. I thought my browser had added some spacing and so stripped it out, but then saw you'd done it deliberately... sorry! Is there somewhere on Wikipedia explaining this, so I can consider where these are needed in future? Paul Holloway (talk) 14:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, yes there is see WP:NBSP for details. Thanks for improving Hannha's article they are high profiles ones at the moment. Keith D (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Brilliant, thanks :) Paul Holloway (talk) 16:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Re:1907
I am happy to discuss any of my individual changes, however the other editor involved has had nothing to offer in the way of meaningful discussion in the years that this disagreement has been going it. HIs (I assume it is a he) persistent wholesale reverting of my (and in some cases others) edits does not appear to be the attitude of someone willing to be constructive and makes discussion of individual edits impossible (as I have mentioned in my edit summaries). I have reverted these reversions as no other course of action seems to be the basis for constructive editing. Claims that I am attempting to "own" the Year articles concerned are ironic given the other users login and edit history! The contributions of other editors would be welcome! Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 04:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It would be good to state your case on the talk page of the article so that others can then have the opportunity to chip in and see if a consensus can be built for inclusion or exclusion of this information. I dropped the same note on the other person's talk page so may be they may come to the wicket. Keith D (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2012
Delivered September 2012 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page. → Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 11:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Advice please
Hi Keith. With your admin hat on, a tiny bit of advice please?

This may come to nothing at all, but I suspect that this story could perhaps have an impact on this article as it does attract a certain amount of axe-grinding from time to time. I could be seen as having a (very mild) COI here so I do not want to start being too reverty, and indeed it might be argued that some coverage might - eventually - be relevant, but not necessarily today right now this second what with us being NOTNEWS and so on and so forth. On the other hand there's RGW and I'm not sure I want to just sit and do nothing if people turn up demanding that we turn the article into a massive witchhunt, list every parking ticket and broken window, etc etc. IF you were me - and I can assure you that you wouldn't like it one bit - what would you do, other than trying to remain calm and polite and not react to anything at all without counting to 100, possibly several times? Like I say, nothing may happen, but I thought that by borrowing your wisdom I might be able to react to it in a more proper manner if it does. All comments most gratefully received! Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:10, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

(because I have all UK schools on  my watchlist, and a BBC live feed). I don't  think  there is any  immediate cause for concern. The article will attract  some vandalism  and speculation as school articles always do, but  I  feel  confident  that  regular school article admins and patrollers will  be able to  handle it intelligently  if and when it  comes. Let's wait and see. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, the school article is not really the place to discuss any detail on this so may be allow a sentence about this to stand when it appears. If these is a clamour for more then suggest a separate article on her that could cover the detail, but it would need to be watched to ensure it remains neutral and balanced. Keith D (talk) 11:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you both very much for the intelligent and helpful responses. Yup, let's see how it goes. I will be delighted if I have mis-anticipated ... er, teacups, storms ... you know what I mean ... Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:30, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * PS But having said that, do you (one/both/whoever) think it would be better if I stayed off the page, or something, for a bit? I've reacted, not unreasonably I hope, to a couple of edits but I do wonder if I should leave it a bit, and - if I am worried - deal with it by less direct means? What d'you think? Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, if you're either the headteachers's husband, the chair of the board of governors, or the policeman leading the enquiry. Goodness, if thers's COI  flying  around perhaps I should voluntarily  demote some of my  school GA's ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hahaha! and thanks. :) No, I am none of the above. Nor indeed all three (just imagine ...) No, my level of COI would be unlikely to induce nosebleeds! Hardly even raised eyebrows, in fact. I'll just be careful, then. Cheers DBaK (talk) 16:17, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey, how are you?
Hey, hows the editing going? Having fun on Wikipedia? --UnhappyandNoFriends (talk) 23:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine thank you. Keith D (talk) 00:05, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Jimmy Savile
I've just come across this article's history. May I suggest you open a discussion on the article's talk page about the details of Savile's death? This reverting back and forth has now turned into an edit war. De728631 (talk) 21:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi thanks for the note. I must say that I did the initial revert. The second revert I did the IP used the edit summary for the removal of death info but actually vandalised the birth location information again. I then locked the page, at second attempt, to stop the vandalism to the birth info. Looks like a newish editor, probably the IP logging in, has tried to remove it a couple of further times and been reverted by another established editor. Keith D (talk) 22:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see any valid rationale for the major deletion in this section (which was itself, I seem to recall, a major distillation of the original entry). That editor's Talk Page history does not inspire confidence. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have opened a discussion on the article talk page and invited comments there, if you want to chip in. Keith D (talk) 22:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Chris Helme
I don't think the edits that you keep inserting on this page are written responsibly, cautiously, and in a dispassionate tone. The versions are not balanced and rely heavily on criticism. The content is unsourced or poorly sourced "Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist". Disproportionate space has been given to the views of tiny minorities and therefore should not be included at all. The contect can clearly be seen as been biased and malicious. Given the potential impact on the biography subjects life and career edits must be balanced and fair to the subject at all times. Edits that are negative in tone, especially when they appear to have been created to disparage the subject, should be deleted at once. Please be responsible with future edits and if in doubt refe to Wikipedias guide on editing biographies of living people. thank you. (Whatisgoingonnow (talk) 19:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC))
 * I reverted your previous change as it removed reference formatting leaving bare URLs etc. in the article. If you wish to edit the article then do so but do not just revert to a previous version that looses formatting and detail. Keith D (talk) 19:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Plusbus - thanks!
Hi Keith, Thanks for catching the Plusbus issue! I misunderstood what needed to be done.

Sorry it created extra work for you!-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 05:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Fabio Borini's goal total
Borini's goals total while he was at Roma is wrong. He scored 10 goals in 26 league and cup matches. Not 25 goals in 24 matches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.251.196.62 (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Have you any source for that? Keith D (talk) 13:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)