User talk:Meetthefeebles/Archive 1

File source problem with File:Tuns 1970.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Tuns 1970.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 13:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Tuns 2010.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tuns 2010.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --(ESkog)(Talk) 13:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

William Clarke.jpg
Your photo of the industrialist William Clarke has somehow overridden that of his namesake, the Nottinghamshire cricketer. I've reverted it but you need to reinstate your image with a different title. Thanks. Jack | talk page 21:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

re:Sheriff Hill
Hello, I've given this a copyedit and read over. It's very good now; a little bit of toning down in points (some of it is a little conversational/local history booky/opinionated at the moment). Other than that though, this is very comprehensive. A few more comments are on the article talk page. Well done! Bob talk 19:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * As it's currently rated as "B Class", the next stage will be Good Article status, which needs to be nominated, which you can add here. Then in about 4 months time (!), somebody will probably come along and assess it against the criteria, which I think it probably passes (except, I suspect, the pubs section which I appreciate is probably an accurate account, but it could be argued is a little too much like a travel guide!). Unfortunately, I don't think I will be able to do the assessment myself as I've made edits to the page, but I'll keep an eye out for when it is reviewed. Don't hesitate to ask anything. Bob talk 12:44, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Sheriff Hill GA nomination
Hello, I've reviewed Sheriff Hill against the good article criteria and unfortunately it still needs a fair bit of work on it before it meets those criteria. There are big problems with verifiability as well as smaller problems with neutrality, both of which are core policies. Please don't be discouraged; I know you've done a lot of work on the article and there is a lot of good information there, it just needs a bit more to meet the specific criteria. You can read my review at Talk:Sheriff Hill/GA1. I would really recommend reading as many FA and GA articles on English settlements as you can, and perhaps submitting it for a peer review before a further nomination. Please feel free to ask me any questions. -- Beloved Freak  13:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Fanny pit miners.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Fanny pit miners.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 21:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Old Mill 1922.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Old Mill 1922.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. There are several other images uploaded by you also being discussed on the same page. Beloved Freak  14:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I saw your comment at Media copyright questions. To be honest, I don't know if it will draw many responses, as my initial comment only had one reply. As mentioned above, I have listed the files that are hosted here at WP:PUF. I hope this can be sorted out, by no means do I want to see the files deleted, but not knowing enough about media copyrights, I had to ask for help on this. I'm pretty sure that they cannot be licensed under creative commons, as one or two of them are, it comes across as though you are the author/owner for those ones. I think the way to keep them will be either to do with them being public domain, or by you being able to verify that you have permission to use them. As I say, I don't know understand too much about copyright expiration & public domain issues. You should be able to verify written permission by going through WP:OTRS. I don't know if you can do that, or if permission would have to come from Gateshead council themselves. Donating copyrighted materials might be helpful here. In getting this sorted, you might also want to look at the ones you've uploaded to Wikimedia commons as they also may be licensed incorrectly and may risk being deleted. I'm sorry that I'm causing you trouble here, I just want to see it sorted out. -- Beloved Freak  12:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Unreviewed article
Hi, I've been reading some of your articles. By the way, the article wizard is meant for new users, and gives them some structure and guidance on creating new articles. You do not need to use this as you clealy know how to structure an article. This will avoid the necessity of getting the "unreviewed article" tag removed, as there won't be one. Of course, you are still free to ask for feedback on an article. Regards &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar
I came across one of your articles as I was patrolling new pages, they're really good. Great job on all the researching, writing and referencing. --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 17:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Queens Head 2010.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Queens Head 2010.jpg, has been listed at Files 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Middleton, Leeds
Do you have any more suggestions? The nominator has not edited this article for over a year but I will do what I can as I have written most of it. PS I will watch this page. J3Mrs (talk) 20:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Just to update you, I have done some work and added more information and references but may not be quite finished. I am not good at spotting my own mistakes, missing punctuation, extra words etc. I have found a good site for climate but unfortunately the rainfall section of it is not working at the minute. I may visit the 200th Anniversary gala at the railway tomorrow, weather and transport permitting, and possibly try to get some photographs. I started the article when I was relatively new to wikipedia and lost interest and returned the sources to a friend. :-( I was really cross that it had been nominated and I hadn't been informed but that's wikipedia for you. J3Mrs (talk) 10:17, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the update. I've been over a couple of times to see how things are progressing and the article is looking much better. I am happy to keep the article on hold for another few days to allow you to complete your work and as agreed, I'll look it over again when you think it is ready. Enjoy the gala tomorrow :) Meetthefeebles (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I've added a couple of brighter images, the sun does shine sometimes. I think you can begin though I haven't added climate but will when the site updates or when I can find some rainfall figures. J3Mrs (talk) 07:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Okay, well I am stuck at work all day today so will look again at the article tomorrow if that is okay with you. Meetthefeebles (talk) 09:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Just seen your message I've been out all day, that's not a problem.J3Mrs (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your extremely thorough review. I have never done one completely by myself so I am pleased I eventually got my act together. Thank you for your earlier forebearance.J3Mrs (talk) 14:29, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem, and well done again for getting the article up to speed (especially as you were not the nominator) Meetthefeebles (talk) 14:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I have never done a review and looked at Deckham. Do you know it has the word "suburb" five times in four lines? I am not going to do the review but I would copyedit out the repetition and redundant words if you like. Writing in the WP:summary style is difficult but I have had a good tutor and it's not easy when you are the sole contributor. Just an offer, turn me down. J3Mrs (talk) 15:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure, fire away. No-one else ever edits any of the articles I write: the WP:NEE project is moribund to the point of death so all of 'my' articles involve me and me alone. A second viewpoint is always helpful Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've read through it and my initial reaction is you have collected so much info but wrapped it up in far too many words. When I'm writing I try never to use also, both, prior to, in fact the last dozen or so points here are really important. If you don't like what I do just tell me to go away. There is so much good stuff in among the words. J3Mrs (talk) 17:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you think? Sorry I keep being interupted. J3Mrs (talk) 18:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it looks good so far. Feel free to continue (I am simultaneously making some changes to the same article) and thanks for your help on this Meetthefeebles (talk) 18:20, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * If I change the meaning just revert, you're picking it up quickly. J3Mrs (talk) 18:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've gone through it once but it needs someone to find my mistakes :-) Just so you know, only link once in the article, there was a lot of overlinking. You don't need to constantly refer to the name or "the suburb", that's understood, the whole article is about Deckham. I did exactly the same as you when I started but was lucky to be helped by the Greater Manchester project. If you've worked alone it's always a good idea to get the article copyedited. I quite like copyediting, I find it oddly theraputic and if you want any doing give me a shout. J3Mrs (talk) 20:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)