User talk:Mattdaviesfsic/Archive 7

June 2023

Class 444
What's the deal with the 2023 end-date for refurbishment? The RailAdvent source seems pretty straightforward. If Jack444010 is referring to them all having been repainted into SWR livery, (which I don't actually know has happened, but it's plausible) that's a process separate to refurbishment. XAM2175 (T) 11:03, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Potentially, I wasn't sure either. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 12:05, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hah, fair enough. XAM2175  (T) 12:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The fleet wide re-livery following SWR's acquisition of the franchise was indeed separate from the all-in-class refurbishment of the 444 (and 450). The refurbishment (distinct from the re-livery) was mandated by DfT via conditions in the new franchise agreement with First MTR. It went much further than seat covers and carpets - it involved new lighting, a completely new configuration of first class, removal of the buffet and the train managers "office" plus tech improvements like WiFi and even train software updates. That's the work referred to in the RailAdvent source. I know a huge amount about the refurb projects (obviously WP:OR) on these and some other classes, but clearly I can't use that knowledge! 10mmsocket (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Haha, that's the Wiki curse! It's no bother, I was just gently chiding Matt for the inaccuracy of this edit summary in dealing with a user who seems to have conflated relivery with refurbishment. XAM2175  (T) 13:12, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

NPP May 2023 Drive Awards

 * Merci, ! Duly added to my collection...! Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 16:34, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * de rien, I shouldn't have had to look that up, but I did. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 16:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Edit warring
You do realise reverting for your friend is still edit warring and a blockable offense right ?, You do realise irrespective of who's right and wrong you still don't revert for people, You do realise that right ?. Just letting you know in case you didn't. As for the pages - I don't care enough to drag everyone there really can't be arsed. – Davey 2010 Talk 16:27, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Happy to butt heads when people like is absolutely right in what he is editing... Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 16:30, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Davey2010, you're edit warring too, in case you hadn't realised. The threat of dramaboarding works best when one isn't standing inside their own glass house. XAM2175  (T) 16:33, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

"Unexplained change which unnecessarily increases page size"
It's a very weak argument, mate. WP:NOTPAPER, WP:PERF, etc etc. XAM2175  (T) 16:30, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Noted, thanks. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 16:32, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It's basically only applicable if it's increasing the size of the page by a ludicrous amount, and even then generally because it's indicative of something silly going into the article. The name of a Commons category, on the other hand, adds no more size than a single citation-needed tag does 😄 XAM2175  (T) 16:35, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023
Hello , Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by  and  with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of, and also some patches from , has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and on IRC.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Railway stations served by Lumo
Template:Railway stations served by Lumo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Caernarfon Railway Station
Hi, just noticed you have reverted edit. Please can you fix this for mobile as it's needs attending to…. Caernarfon_Railway_Line.jpg Onshore (talk) 19:43, 25 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm not experienced in the areas of bugs and problems, unfortunately; however, you may wish to go to WT:UKRAIL and describe the issue there (particularly if it affects multiple pages). Hope that helps. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 19:46, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry but if you're not experienced then why did you revert me fix? Please show image of your website error? I may have to forward this to Wikipedia admins. Onshore (talk) 19:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Please do so they can look into what might be causing the problems. I can't send an image, but if you look at what your edit did on the Desktop version, you'll see that the lead turned into what you get with Template:Code. Whether this is what you got on the mobile site, I don't know. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 19:52, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. I will forward this on. Onshore (talk) 21:20, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Madhav Temples,Prayagraj moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Madhav Temples,Prayagraj. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has too many problems of language or grammar. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I know, I was the previous reviewer - just not the page creator! Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 06:04, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The thing allows me to notify multiple people, and I would rather err on the side of notifying too many editors than too few. So we agree that parts of the article are incomprehensible.  Robert McClenon (talk) 06:38, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, fair enough. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 06:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Salisbury rail crash
It you look at the interim report, you will see that it states "

From: Rail Accident Investigation Branch Published 3 November 2021 Last updated 27 June 2023 — See all updates"

Amost at the bottom of the interim report it states "RAIB’s draft investigation report into this accident has now been sent to interested parties as part of the statutory consultation process. RAIB expects to publish the final report shortly after the consultation process is completed." At the very bottom of the interim report, it says "Published 3 November 2021 Last updated 27 June 2023 - hide all updates

27 June 2023

Updated to reflect progress of the investigation."

I trust that you will undo your revert of my edit. Mjroots (talk) 01:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅, thanks for letting me know. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 05:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Class 730 number built
Hi Matt, I think we both know the number of class 730s that are said to have been built on the page is way below reality, 730038 and 730039 are on testing. But what sources could be used on the page to verify it?JamesVilla44 (talk) 11:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The easiest way is by rail magazines for that sort of detail - has some unspoken "emeritus" responsibility for these sorts of updates! If it can't be easily reliably sourced, it would be easiest to remove it and leave in the "Ordered" number as that can be sourced fairly easily.
 * Hope that helps? Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 11:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)