User talk:Keith D/Archive 8

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter September 2008
Looks like the paper lad is late again !! Shall I give him a prod?--Harkey (talk) 15:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, I have already raised a bug report on JIRA but got the title wrong, so he should pick it up. Are you back to normal or still attempting to harvest? Not got much done as I have attracted attention from Grawp. Keith D (talk) 15:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * "Attempting" is the operative word. I noticed that you were having a few hiccups. Keep smiling :-)--Harkey (talk) 16:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Managed to get the paper-boy out of bed at last! Keith D (talk) 10:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

KC Stadium screen
Hi Keith. The existing reference has other information, even though they appear to have made a mistake on the type of screen it is, so I'd go for option B I think. I'm not sure how, can you? Thanks. Beve (talk) 14:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have added a note. You can tweak the wording if you do not like what I have written. Keith D (talk) 17:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2008
Delivered September 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 10:04, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

A Cite template for references to material in the (UK) National Archives
Keith, I have been slowly working on the comments you made on the Whitby and Pickering Railway article. Some of the references I am adding need to cite material produced (and in some cases published) by the early railway companies or reports by Railway Inspectors; all of which is held in what is now The National Archives although I still think of as the Public Record Office. I imagine some similar problems may arise when referencing material in other similar institutions in other countries, perhaps even the Library of Congress.

So far in different articles I have tried Citation and Cite Book but neither really meet my requirements, trying to fit the necessary information into them gives a rather 'klunky' feel. Neither template (to my knowledge) supports quoting things like volume and minute numbers when referencing company minute books

Is there already a more appropriate cite template that I could use ? Or could a suitable new template be created, if so further consultation with possible users would be needed to ensure it covers all required fields. I doubt my very limited experience of template writing would be adequate for this task - are their others who might take it on ? (and is there a more appropriate place I should have raised this?).

XTOV (talk) 22:04, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Unsure as to what would be appropriate you could have a look at Citation templates which gives some details of the different templates available. Also try asking on that talk page Wikipedia talk:Citation templates to see if anyone knows what would be suitable. I could possibly produce a template if there is none suitable and no one else steps forward. Not too much into templates but could possiibly manage to hack one from an existing template. Keith D (talk) 22:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Keith, I have reposted a slightly modified version of my original query to Wikipedia talk:Citation templates as you suggested; if they provide a solution I will not bother you further (but don't hold your breath). I will update this entry with any result (unless it is already archived).  XTOV (talk) 22:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Are there problems with the English Wikipedia Servers ?
Keith, I have been experiencing very variable and sometimes no response on Wikipedia for some days, especially when submitting changes,  some changes to the W&P article apparently refused to be submitted and I was unable to ping the en.wikipedia.org IP address but an hour later I checked and my changes were there.

Just now I experienced similar problems submitting my above addition to your talk page but managed to open the page on a different tab to find three copies of my addition - I have 'tidied up my mess' but am left with the question, is it a en wikipedia end problem or something nearer home ?

XTOV (talk) 22:19, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I cannot find any reports of problems but I was unable to get to the servers about an hour ago so may be there was a problem that has been fixed. Keith D (talk) 22:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

South Shields
Cheers for the note, but you'll notice from the edit history that I had discussed the issue on the talk page, but the anon IP was unwilling to engage in a discussion, preferring to go off on a tangent. DrFrench (talk) 08:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * With different IPs it makes things difficult, I was hoping to issue a similar warning to them but they have only done 2 reverts from the same IP. I may think about protecting it to force them to discuss on talk page if your latest change gets reverted again. Keith D (talk) 08:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Independent schools in East Yorkshire
OK, I've created the category and will move the schools over. Kanguole (talk) 10:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for quick response. Keith D (talk) 11:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

miles/km
Hi Keith: I used metric first in the 2 articles I created today, following what I'd read at Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-09-08/Dispatches_2 ... but going back there to check, I find it was a red herring! PamD (talk) 10:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I have almost given up with the MOS changes and stick to what it was, there is too many arguments and changes back and forth to be productive. I have come to the conclusion that if we follow every single policy and guideline there will be very few articles, with little real content and so few links that navigation is impossible.


 * I tend to go for miles / imperial first for UK articles and link the first occurrence though the MOS says they should not generally be linked. Though I do tend to go metric first for heights. Keith D (talk) 13:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hebden
Thanks for your comments, Keith. I'll work on your suggestions over the next few weeksLangcliffe (talk) 18:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Back in (Wikipedia) action !!
Harvest is just about over. I've been keeping an eye on Wikipedia (sometimes on my mobile phone in the fields)but I feel very rusty and out of touch. Could take a while to get "up to speed".:-)--Harkey (talk) 16:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably the urgent things from the project talk page, with deadlines, are the sections -
 * Henry Moore at WP:FAR
 * Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Yorkshire


 * Also if you have some Literary interests let me know for that one as I got no response to request.


 * Keith D (talk) 21:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Keith. I have read the criticism and recent edit history of the Henry Moore article and the issues appear to be being dealt with. The choice of Wikipedia 0.7 articles has implications for the project. So far I have only glanced at the selection criteria but maybe some should be reclassified by us to reflect improvements since their last grading? What is the timescale for this, and how do we prioritise?--Harkey (talk) 08:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The list of articles selected is given here 43 of them, we can request others on the request form. Changing our ratings now will not affect the result, I have reassessed where I spot major changes to articles but not in all cases. (Still in tagging mode I have nearly got through the West Yorkshire ones but have not really started on South Yorkshire yet.) The one disappointment on the selected articles is the sport ones where we only appear to have football articles picked. Thought that the cricket team would have made it or even some of the rugby league clubs.


 * What we have to do before October 20th is to have vetted the 43 selected articles to pick a clean version for the CD. We also need to sort out some of the clean-up type tags on them. Currently I have got clean versions for some of them and recorded them as requested here. Improving them generally would help but do not know if we will get the time for that. East Riding of Yorkshire was one I have a clean version for, but could do with work as seems bitty as History section is near the top and the Wappentakes section near the bottom. I requested help on Leeds and Bradford talk pages and some have stepped in and done some work on these, mainly on the references/dead links. The Leeds article seems to be causing problems again over Leeds/City of Leeds but I suspect that Yorkshirian is behind this.


 * I was planning to update the selected clean version, nearer the cut-off date, if good edits are made after selection using the diffs to identify changes that have been done. I assume that those articles with multiple projects on should get a vet by each of the projects involved so may change at each vetting. Keith D (talk) 11:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Sorry to take so long to reply. I have downloaded the list and decided to have a go at the "Start" class articles to try to do something about the geography etc.. North Yorkshire is the obvious one then Yorkshire and the Humber. Do you know of any GA county articles so I can copy the format, please?--Harkey (talk) 07:48, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again, the only one I know of is Middlesex which is at GA, though Somerset is at FA so I would look at those for ideas. I have also spotted that the list of selected articles does not match the list for recording versions, there is a difference of 10 articles so I have left a query for them. Keith D (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Account deletion
Can accounts on Wikipedia be deleted, and if so, under which conditions? Weevilcatcher (talk) 19:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Unsure exactly what circumstances you are talking about but take a look at Right to vanish and see if that answers your question. Keith D (talk) 20:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Basically, I had sock puppets which were never discovered, and if possible would like them deleted. Weevilcatcher (talk) 09:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * As far as I can see Deleting your account indicates that an actual deletion is not possible. You can have the user page/talk page deleted and the account blocked or you can point them to your new account. Read the rest of that page for details. Keith D (talk) 09:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Well if they can't be deleted, I don't see that there's much point taking any action. There aren't any contributions against the accounts, and I don't intend that there will be any contributions from them. Weevilcatcher (talk) 16:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Oughty Bridge railway station
I see you have re-added the gridref for Oughty Bridge station, I agree with your reasoning, but could you correct it? The Latitude and Longitude give the correct location, but I don't know how to work out gridrefs Talltim (talk) 20:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I assumed the previous figure was correct, I have corrected it now I think. The co-ords given do not hit the railway line but are somewhat left of it, on streetmap at least. Keith D (talk) 20:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * hmm, Google gives it to the right. I assume gridref isn't quite as accurate as Lat-Long, or as accuratly implemented by the various mapping services. Thanks Talltim (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProjectBannerShell
Hi Keith added above template to A61 Road as had multiple project banners and you had used it on some other articles id added project banners to, but i see it comes with a page of comments signed by you. Is ther a Blank version to use or is this a custom template of yours ?

I now 'practicing' assessing articles on the Sheffield project (as they have now added grading) and was trying to leave them tidier (after you had to follow round cleaning up and assessing on the Yorkshire articles I project tagged) (so to speak). Some of your earlier assessments are probably out of date now for the article, should i leave them as is and let you reasses them ort upgrade them i.e. stub to start ? - BulldozerD11 (talk) 23:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No this is not a template that I have done any work on, though I have commented on various problems that I have had with it. Unsure what you mean by a blank template as you just use it on the talk page. You just put on to the talk page. Then after the = sign put the templates for each of the projects that are required on the page, though you need to have "nested=yes" in each project template to tell it that it is inside the banner shell. Keith D (talk) 11:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * On the assessment, you can change the rating if articles have changed since my rating as it is difficult to pick up on changes to articles over time. Also the new C rating has been introduced and some of the start ones need upgrading. Should really have a scan of them all at some point but still need to complete the tagging pass. I have nearly completed West Yorkshire so that just leaves South Yorkshire to tackle before going back and doing the 3 types of article that I have not tagged as they are generally covered by other projects. Those are railway stations, people and schools. Keith D (talk) 11:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Access date.
and the access date shouldn't really be in American format either. :/ Govvy (talk) 13:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The template uses dates in ISO format for the accessdate field, but overall dates are a general mess and progress on sorting them out is slow and contentious. Keith D (talk) 14:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

2nd opinion
Hi Keith can you give me a second opinion on an articles assessment for Nicholas Fitzherbert as I'm grading some of the Derbyshire articles to clear up the outstanding ones (Bios are not my main field of experties). Thanks in advance - BulldozerD11 (talk) 21:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, I would probably go with a C but it is rather thin on the ground. I have no idea what the relevance of the photo in the infobox is to the article. I tend to be not too good on Biographies, though have done some copy-editing to get ready for the DVD release. Keith D (talk) 22:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Keith - My interpretation was that the grading is related more to quality than quantity. I was asking to get a better feel if it a B. But from your comment Ill take it as not giving wide enoth coverage then.
 * A major thing with articles is the question of how big they should be, as its obiously about being informative, and accurate (then it gets to the WP is not a repository for any old info). Wikipedia cannot hope to be the definitive work on a subject and should not be seen as that, is one interprtation. I came across a article the other day that summed up the size isssue as compairing a Village to London & summing up as you can write far more about London than a Village.   A lot of articles are rated as stubs  when they far exceed the definition given for a stub, but in the case of Start class articles obiously the C class was only added recently so may need re grading.
 * I wounder if the grading taggs should generate a date related list likes done for the cleanup tags by a bot. Then old articles an be reasssessed by date as most editors are probably not (nor have time to) go back to loads of the obscure articles. - Aprieciate you taking the time to pass on your expertise - Thanks BulldozerD11 (talk) 23:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It is always difficult to locate when an article was graded, currently have to search the history same goes for locating the version of the article that was rated. A possible way of doing it would be to add a parameter to the template that you fill in when it is rated with the month/year as you do with the maintenance type templates like . You could then get it to drop the article into dated categories such as Category:WikiProject X rated September 2008. Though I think that that would need a wider discussion to get agreement to do something like that. Keith D (talk) 23:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes thats what i was meaning to generate a Category list for each month for the project. I wounder ifthe coding wizards can get it to auto fill out date, adding the parametter to template code should be relativly easy for a manual version.
 * I find scanning stuff easier since adding WikiEd, as get a pop up preveiw of articles changes histories etc (only fault is at botom of page it disapears below visible area. Its great for the watchlist patroling/reviewing. - BulldozerD11 (talk) 00:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

(indent out) Keith can you look at Westbourne School and see if some of content is inapropriate, as slim link to school and about living person. - thanks - BulldozerD11 (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It appears to be accepted that this type of things are in school articles, I have seen it in several see Headlands School and Community Science College for one which I can think of. It is referenced indirectly by the third link in the external links section. Keith D (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks I leav it then if its consider accepatable and does not breach any of the multitude of polices (which im not totaly familiar with). Was unsure but I would have removed it as unsourced if the EL was not threre.  - BulldozerD11 (talk) 19:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * May be worth making the external link a reference for that section to hide it a bit in the smaller text of a reference section. Keith D (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Converted EL to inline refs or proper ELs from general refs - BulldozerD11 (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

(indent out)Another 2nd opinion please for Sir_Brooke_Boothby,_6th_Baronet C or B - thanks again - BulldozerD11 (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I assume you mean on the grading - I would go with a C may be would get a B with a bit of work. Needs some sorting out on the See also, References & External links sections which appear to be jumbled up, may need a notes/biography type section. Getting into the biographies now just completed a copy-edit pass of Sean Bean for the DVD. Keith D (talk) 00:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Keith, your more familair with WP:MOS (which gets more important at B) than me after your work to get the FA articles etc. I not come across many B or GA /FA article on the subjects i'm familiar with / working on. I go and do some more Sheffield articles now Derbyshires finished. Suppose looking at the selected list for DVD and copy edit would be an idea as well - Cheers BulldozerD11 (talk) 00:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hull City Graph
Hi Keith D,

The strange looking notches in the League Tiers appear when the number of clubs in the different leagues get changed.

The first bump on the Hull City graph was caused when the old First Division was reduced from 22 clubs in 1987 to 21 in 1988 and then to 20 in 1989; in 1992 these changes were reversed and the top tier went back to 22 clubs. You can also see that in 1993 when the Premier League completed its first season all 22 clubs of the old First Division continued to be included in the top tier but this was reduced to 20 in 1995 when four teams were relegated from the league and only two promoted. It is quite confusing and it is very easy to make mistakes so let me know if you spot an error. --Payo (talk) 20:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation, may be worth adding a note to the image description page. Keith D (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

October Newsletter
Thanks for doing the October Newsletter. I keep getting called away. The wolf has to be kept from the door!!--Harkey (talk) 18:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, I am hoping to have a read over it later when the servers get back to normal. Not making much headway today, still have not got through the watchlist with the slowness of responses from the servers. Also still got over half of the selected entries for the DVD to look at, one a day is about all I can manage, have left the difficult ones until last. Keith D (talk)