User talk:Keith Edkins/archive3

Java Earthquake
If this entry is added to today's Current Events page, then I can immediately put it up on ITN. Thanks. --Madchester 08:03, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok... you did it while I was posting this message. --Madchester 08:03, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh don't worry about the procedure.... I don't tinker with the adminisrative duties of the main page myself, either. :-) --Madchester 08:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Council Make Up
Keith, I'm not sure what source of information you are using but I notice your recent edits have set Gosport to be Con control and Portsmouth to Lib Dem. This incorrect as both are NOC, as confirned by United Kingdom local elections, 2006 full results and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/vote2006/locals/html/region_99999.stm. I have not checked other edits you may have made Nuttah68 12:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what terms should be used, but I still believe your edits give undue weight where it is not merited. In both cases I have given they imply the party named has the ability to change things on their own. Living on the south coast I can assure you that on both Portsmouth and Gosport councils the largest party is not in control but has formed a ]minority government' that relies on support to carry out its functions. Taking Portsmouth, the executive is given to the party with the most seats, regardless of whether that is a majority or not, but the executive has to pass any significant decisions through the full council. Nuttah68 13:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Re. the mayor or chairman. These come from the councillors (unless directly elected), so if they are from largest party it means they are one vote down unless the mayor votes. So in cases such as Gosport or Portsmouth where the mayor is from the party with half of the seats it does not tip the balance if they vote.
 * I'm still not comfortable with using the word 'control' where no one party holds a majority. For anyone not well versed on UK Local Government this equates to power. Nuttah68 14:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That seems a reasonable compomise between brevity and notlosing detail for the majority of users who are not UK based.

Spurious text in entry for town of Rushmoor - can you correct?
Keith: I noticed what seems like spurious text in the entry for Rushmoor in the frinal paragraph. It sounds like you know some things about towns in the Hampshire area, and thought you might be able to confirm or correct the entry.. The spurious text would appear to be (my italics for emphasis) "...The Connaught School, Munchkinland in Oz ."

Thanks
For that last edit on 2006 Pacific Hurricane SeasonO-TOWN&#39;S AT 06:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Azores Central Group.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Azores Central Group.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 05:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Avro York.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Avro York.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Angr 16:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

... and many others!

Commons images
I've noticed you have uploaded a number of images to commons without source info (check your commons talk page). Can you provide it? Thanks.--Nilfanion (talk) 15:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Florence pictures
May I ask why you're changing Hurricane Florence 2006.jpg back to TS Florence 07sept 2006.jpg in the Hurricane Florence (2006) infobox? The hurricane image is more recent and at/near peak intensity. Also, the TS image is immediately below the infobox, illustrating the storm history. TransUtopian 22:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. KEEP the newer image. Good kitty 22:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I produce a complete new infobox from a spreadsheet any time, for speed and (I thought) reliability - and I hadn't noticed there was a new image. I'll get it right next time.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 06:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I copied your reply to me in case Good kitty or anyone is curious and doesn't want to follow two talk pages. That's quite all right. I thought it might be semi-automated since it was puzzling to me why you kept reverting to the other image during infobox updates without explanation. No harm done. Ta. TransUtopian 14:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Images/Error cones
Uh, might I ask why you uploaded Image:13E.Lane Cone (2006).gif when there was no harm in using (and uploading over) the old Image:13E.NONAME 5-day track.gif? – Chacor 09:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I've already tagged the old image for deletion. Not sure if it's really necessary to standardise it, though, although I do see something wrong with the old image name - there were also 13E.NONAMEs last year, the year before, etc. In the Atlantic right now they're using "TD8atlantic2006" or something for Helene's track, aren't they? I don't think it's a major problem, as long as it's clear which storm it is in what year. – Chacor 10:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No, not a problem. – Chacor 15:44, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Please be more careful with updates
Now I know you are using a spreadsheet, but you are still reverting images back to old ones. There was a new Gordon image that's been there since yesterday afternoon and you reverted it back to an old NRL one. Now someone's uploaded a duplicate of that image. Maybe you shouldn't include the image part in your spreadsheet. Good kitty 15:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Gorgeous Cat 3 hurricanes duet image
Image:Hurricanes Gordon Helene 2006.jpg

Gorgeous and descriptive. ("This duet thus catches a glimpse of how storm appearances change as a hurricane matures.") I hope it finds a place in the main article or one or both the eventual Gordon/Helene articles after the Azores warning is past. TransUtopian 12:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image:Hurricanes Gordon Helene 2006.jpg
Sorry. I had been trying to upload them all at the same scale. Its mostly important when there is landmass involved because the borders really stick out when the resolution is low. As far as the broken image goes, I've found that the size of the image really has nothing to do with it. Sometimes they seem to break when you upload a new version of the file into an old one. Other times there is no reason, except that Wiki hates Photoshop. I think the problem with your upload was the latter. If you have Gimp, you should open the image with that and save over the one you have. Uncheck "Optimize", "Force Baseline JPEG", and "Remove EXIF data" (which says the wrong information anyway). Save at least 90 percent of the quality. This works 95 percent of the time. Photoshop-created images break a LOT. I've managed to fix a bunch of images by doing this. Good kitty 21:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I hope you have noticed that raw NASA images fail frequently enough. I've uploaded another massive version over the top, it should work now (its twice as large though :/). Don't have a little fight on that image, it takes too much effort to clean up after you :P--Nilfanion (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * FYI, I rarely get a failed image download for the scale down version (my prefs set to 1024x768 max on descrip pages). On the rare occasion it doesn't download, I refresh and it has always loaded.
 * The yooge NASA images sometimes overload my browser cache/512MB RAM, so when I see a 6MB image I want to see, I right-click to save to disk. TransUtopian 02:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:TD82006atlantic.gif
I reverted Image:TD82006atlantic.gif as your last upload was 0 Bytes. Agathoclea 16:54, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I created a baby stub for the article benzethonium chloride.
Free free to jump into the contributions with this benzethonium chloride stub. Good Luck. BenzethoniumChloride 06:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

ACE
I just added 0.12 straight to 70.9, and got caught in that edit conflict. Go ahead and input the correct rounded value. – Chacor 15:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Tags for deletion
If they are past tracks, delete them. They won't be needed anymore. CrazyC83 18:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Brézé
Hello ! I noticed that you just created Brézé about the family of that name. However, there's an as-yet-untranslated stub at Brézé on the commune in Maine-et-Loire from which they took their name. I don't know whether it would be better to rename your article, or to call the translation of the French one Brézé, Maine-et-Loire. Best regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

EPac ACE
Hi there! It seems that you might have missed adding one the best track values to your spreadsheet. The best track for John reduced the ACE by 0.0625 from the operational value. Thanks! --Ajm81 06:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Aviation Newsletter delivery
The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hawker_Fury_(Yugoslav).jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Hawker_Fury_(Yugoslav).jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Yonatan talk 07:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed constituency maps
Hi there, I notice you made a number of these a while back (June '05 looks like). I'm thinking of putting them in vector form, but did you ever get round to making one for Greater Manchester, Greater London, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire or Tyne & Wear? I can't seem to find those ones currently on the wiki? Richard B 20:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Your current storm info script
Hey Keith, could you please make grammatical adjustments to your script? Since the wording used is "as of TIME", the following should be in present tense ("is estimated", "has", "is moving" etc.) rather than in the past. Cheers! – Chacor 14:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * One more thing, about images... when uploading them please crop out the NRL header and footer if possible. Also, VIS images are much preferred over infrared ones. Thanks. – Chacor 09:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Fairey Fulmar.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Fairey Fulmar.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Fairey Fulmar.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Fairey Fulmar.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:19, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Flossie's ACE
FWIW I think it might be better to consider the final NHC advisory as being in the CPac, as it is operational for 12Z (and not 15Z) and at 12Z it was still in EPac. – Chacor 15:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh. Big typo. I must be asleep. Sorry. Final advisory as being in the EPac, not the CPac. – Chacor 15:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

CPHC forecast/advisories
Hey Keith, when updating Flossie's storm information for 03Z you put down the position accuracy as 20 nm. However, the 03Z position accuracy was to 5 nm - it was the eye diameter that was 20 nm. Please be more careful next time, given the sensitive nature of current storm info. Cheers, – Chacor 12:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Current storm info on 2007 AHS
Hey, I know you use a script to update the current storm info, but could you spell out the cardinal directions in the current storm information section? Abbreviations aren't necessary since they're already abbreviated in the infobox. --Core desat 02:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I hate to be a pain, but can you ensure that your script doesn't remove hPa? Both the infobox and current storm information should have mbar (hPa; XX inHg). – Chacor 02:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Sat images
Can you please not use sat images with those ugly yellow pass lines? Just use regular or MODIS visibles. – Chacor 13:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Author (biology)
A template has been added to the article Author (biology), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Spa toss 19:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:2007 07L 5-day track.gif
Could you please upload further instances of this image into commons so that there is no duplicity and also other languages can use the image? Thanks. --213.155.231.26 11:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Bristol_Buckingham.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bristol_Buckingham.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 18:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Douglas_Havoc_II.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Douglas_Havoc_II.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 19:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

English District Populations
Hello! - I recently noticed on the Manchester page that the infobox uses ONS statistics to display the population, whilst the text uses accessable references. It seems now the two hae a significant difference. The content shows Manchester's population as 452,000 (using 2006 mid-year estimates) and the infobox states 441,200. I was wondering whether you could update the population on, what I think is the template we use, Template:English district population. Regards,  Onnaghar  talk ! ctrb ! er 12:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC) P.S - I was directed here from another user, see here

Local government districts of England
Hello Keith Edkins,

Just thought I'd bring to your attention that a Template:Infobox England district is being constructed (finally!) to aid in the standardisation and improvement of the districts of England articles.

The aim is to replace some of the pink "faux-infobox" tables as seen at articles such as Metropolitan Borough of Rochdale. I've seen your name on some of the sytax of related templates and thought you might want to take a look at this early stage and make any changes you feel might be necessary. -- Jza84 · (talk) 12:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

FAR National parks of England and Wales
National parks of England and Wales has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. &mdash; Rod talk 20:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Arms-staffs.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Arms-staffs.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 14:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Templates
Hi, just contacting you as you appear to be maintaining the templates such as English district population for UK district statistics. I was wondering if there was a template that gives the reference for the information produced that could be used in articles rather than hard coding it into the articles and then it be wrong when the template changes. Thanks Keith D (talk) 21:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Links to Wikisource EB1911
I've been working in the mostly moribund project WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/1911 verification, and the whole idea of absorbing EB1911 material has come under attack at Wikipedia talk:Plagiarism. As you may know, there was a project a few years ago to make use of the public-domain 1911 material to ensure there was at least equal breadth of coverage in WP, even if the results are often archaic. It occurred to me that including Wikisource1911Enc tags would be appropriate, but then I noticed you had already done a batch of those back in 2006. What drove that activity, and is it normal to expect the WP->WS links to be inserted whenever an EB1911 article is added to WS? David Brooks (talk) 17:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stephen Eyre
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Stephen Eyre, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Terraxos (talk) 23:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of San Salvador and Rum Cay
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article San Salvador and Rum Cay, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --YbborTalk 21:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nichollstown and Berry Islands
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Nichollstown and Berry Islands, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --YbborTalk 21:23, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:Aqua spacecraft.jpg
Image:Aqua spacecraft.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Aqua satellite simulation.jpg. Commons is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image(s) will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)