User talk:Nev1/Archives/July–September 2008

Rochdale canal
Hi Nev1, thanks for the help with the article and please continue :) I didn't want to seem rude and just remove it but there was never a connection between the MBB canal and the Rochdale canal - the only access to the Rochdale was via the Irwell, and through the Manchester and Salford Junction Canal, or via the Bridgewater Canal also from the Irwell. Parrot of Doom (talk) 13:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, you're right, I misread the source I was using. No need to apologise, it was my mistake :-) Nev1 (talk) 13:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I've added a load more info and references. Do you think the history section could do with splitting up? I'm thinking of resubmitting it but could use another trained eye to have a look before I do that. I'm wondering if it makes sense to reorganise the references so the little numbers are in order, but I'm not sure if thats overkill or not :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 18:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The history section looks fine to me; but if you do split it, how would you do it? I'll take a closer look at the rest of the article and leave my thoughts on the talk page. Reasonable people would consider ordering the references overkill, but he powers that be over at WP:GA like it ;-) Nev1 (talk) 18:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Reading through the one section that lacks references is the first para of the 'current status' section. Its difficult to get info on this as most people don't even know a canal existed in those places where its buried, its all my own research (walking and taking photos).  I'm tired though :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I couldn't find anything on the BBC website, but I think it might be worth looking at the websites run by local papers, they may be keeping the public up to date. Since it runs through Bolton, Bury, and Manchester I think the Manchester Evening News and the Bolton Evening News might be worth searching (no idea what Bolton has). Nev1 (talk) 19:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The Bury Times says that there are 17 locks at Nob End. Don't think I'll be quoting them somehow :D Parrot of Doom (talk) 22:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the Military history project
 Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including WPMILHIST Announcements there.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, article logistics, and other tasks.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
 * If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention.
 * The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Woody (talk) 21:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Double DYK

 * Bugger me, I didn't know two could appear at once :-) Nev1 (talk) 11:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks a lot for touching up Hylton Castle, especially for streamlining the refs - I had no idea I could do that that could be done. It's really appreciated :-) Craigy (talk) 00:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you only need to give a reference a name if you intend to use it more than once, so it could be slimmed down even further. Nev1 (talk) 00:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the further additions and corrections you made. Do you think the article's ready to be taken to FAC now? This is the first attempt I've made at trying to get an article to FA so it's a new experience for me. Craigy (talk) 17:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Not a problem, it's an interesting subject. I'd be inclined to take the article to WP:GAC first while may help to iron out anything we haven't yet fixed. You could take it straight to WP:FAC if you prefer, but in my experience castles don't have to hang around waiting for a review very long at GAC. You may like to know that there are no castle Featured Articles, although there are a handful of Good Articles (Beeston Castle, Buckton Castle, and Halton Castle are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head although at the moment I'm working on Warwick Castle). FA should certainly be the final aim, and whichever route you decide to go down you'll have my support. Nev1 (talk) 17:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot, I've taken it to GAC. If it passes, hopefully some other users will be able to add or suggest their own touches to get it up to FA. I realised there weren't any castle FAs so didn't want to set a precedent with Hylton, on terms of the length of the article, even though the article is comprehensive. Good luck with Warwick! I imagine (along with other larger castles like Windsor or Alnwick) it will make a great FA. Craigy (talk) 18:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't be worried about setting precedents, especially for length; it's easier to remove unimportant information than search through sources to fill a gap. The current castles GAs are relatively short for a number of reasons, usually because they were not in use for very long. Warwick's still got a long way to go but there's plenty of stuff to work from. I'm surprised that castles aren't better covered on wikipedia.
 * One thing just occurred to me, is there a plan of Hylton Castle available? What would be ideal is an old one that's out copyright, failing that a fair use one would be good. I've found it helps when explaining the layout etc of the castle. Nev1 (talk) 18:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Emery's page 109 provides some good floor plans (although he doesn't include the minstels' gallery). I created my own version of the ground floor by tracing Emery's, but it looked too small on the article so I took it out and deleted it. Also, I was only using MS Paint so was limited in how I could draw it or rescale it. I didn't see any in the old books I consulted when writing the article so I don't think there's any out of copyright ones (at least not readily available anyway). Craigy (talk) 18:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Google won't let me see page 109, but I think if we could copy the plan that would suffice. Maybe we could copy it straight from the PDF and slap a fair use rationale on it. Failing that, a copy (even in paint) would be a start. There are users who could sort us out a nice plan in photoshop or something if you can provide source material to work from. Nev1 (talk) 18:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I've just made a few comments on the article's talk page. It needs a bit of work yet to get through GA I think, so a very wise decision not to nominate it for FAC. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reminder, Nev. I meant to get round to it at some point. I'll do what I can today, but my prose stinks, so I guess that'll need tweaking before the article's final review. Craigy (talk) 07:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much and thanks for all your help :-) I think I forgot to say well done for Warwick...so well done! Craigy (talk) 12:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:46, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Warwick Castle
I've had a first run through Warwick Castle, and made a few changes. As ever, if you don't agree with any of them, feel free to revert. I'll probably have another run through over the weekend.

I don't think you'll get picked up over comprehensiveness at FAC, but I did struggle a few times with trying to follow the narrative flow. For instance:


 * "The castle was taken in a surprise attack by John Giffard in 1264 who was looking after Kenilworth Castle for Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester." How are those two things related?


 * I've changed it to "The castle was taken in a surprise attack by the forces of Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester from Kenilworth Castle in 1264." This should hopefully make the link with Kenithworth Castle a bit clearer. Nev1 (talk) 22:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * "In the early 17th century, Robert Smythson was commissioned to draw a plan of the castle before any changes were made. Cavalry horses were stolen from the medieval stables in the castle in 1605 as part of the Gunpowder Plot. When the title of Earl of Warwick was created for the third time in 1618, the Greville family were still in possession of Warwick Castle;" The comment about the Gunpowder Plot comes like a bolt out of the blue and is then just abandoned.


 * A bit more has been added and it's been moved around so it hopefully seems a little less sudden. Part of the problem is the source only mentions it briefly too. Nev1 (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Presentation of the units of measurement will need to be tidied up before FAC. It's imperial (metric) at the start of the article then switches to metric (imperial) towards the end.


 * I think it was just the units in the location section, these have been swapped so I think metric goes first throughout the article. Nev1 (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I think a lot of readers will struggle with this: "the title's third creation", right in the first paragraph of the lead. Too much detail for the lead perhaps?


 * I've avoided mention of the creation of the title and just said that for a while the castle did not belong to the earls of Warwick. Nev1 (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There's a strong groundswell of opinion building up at FAC that linking dates is evil. Look at the Greater Manchester article, for instance, which Tony went through and removed all the date linking from. You'd get a few extra brownie points for being ahead of the game there I think by doing the same thing to this article.


 * Fortunately there weren't too many instances of autoformatting, but it will be a real pain in the arse rolling this out across articles. Hasn't somebody come up with a bot to do the work yet? Nev1 (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to give feedback without appearing to be negative, but I really don't mean to be at all. I think that with just a bit more tinkering this would make a very plausible FAC. BTW, I don't know if you noticed, but you were right about Ordsall Hall. Sailed through its GA nomination. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback, helpful as always. Once I've acted on the stuff you've pointed out I'll probably nominate the article. I never doubted Ordsall Hall would pass, it seemed like a really good piece of work. I think the smaller articles can sometimes slip under the radar. Nev1 (talk) 22:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've got a really small one up my sleeve, just as soon as I get a paper from Jstor. I really do admire your "balls on the block" approach to FAC I have to say. Are you afraid of nothing? :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well you can't be sure if it's going to work if you don't try. Although I imagine people at FAC would be happier if I brought them the finished product. Good luck with the Manchester Mummy, I've noticed it evolving nicely and it's an interesting subject. Nev1 (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, in regards to the query on how to rephrase "The current castle, built in stone during the reign of King Henry II, is on the same site as the earlier Norman motte-and-bailey castle.", I rethought about my opinion. I now think it should be fine since the motte-and-bailey concept encompass the walled-in village. I see that Malleus is copy-editing the article and I think he is doing well, so good luck on your FAC! Jappalang (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers again for all your help folks. I'll read over the article again tomorrow, tinkering with the flow etc and probably nominate it then. Nev1 (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It may me not understanding, but how is this: "It is traditionally associated with the earldom of Warwick, one of the oldest in England, although it was not in their possession between the early 17th and mid-18th centuries. The castle was owned by the Greville family until the 1970s", consistent with this: "In 1604, the ruinous castle was given to Sir Fulke Greville ... When the title of Earl of Warwick was created for the third time in 1618, the Greville family were still in possession of Warwick Castle; the Grevilles retained ownership of the castle until it was sold to The Tussauds Group in 1978."? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 01:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, the Grevilles were made earls of Warwick further down the line, about the mid 18th century. It took me a while to untangle the issue, all I have to do is get it written down. Nev1 (talk) 01:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Warwick Castle again
Hi, best of luck with the FAC and thanks for an excellent article on my local castle. Graham. Graham Colm Talk 18:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the support, and I'm glad you enjoyed reading the article which should probably be one of the FA criteria. It's a fantastic castle, one with a more complex history than I had realised when I decided to overhaul the article. I wouldn't mind if it was my local castle, sadly Manchester doesn't have one anywhere near as impressive. 18:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, especially going to the effort of editing the article yourself. Nev1 (talk) 21:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure thing; glad to help. Good luck with your FAC.&mdash;RJH (talk) 22:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Main Page today! Woo hoo! ;) Craigy (talk) 17:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm really pleased it's on the main page, but it's been a bit nerve racking not being able to keep an eye on it for vandalism most of the day. It's still in one piece though (whispers) and most importantly there's not been much criticism :-) Nev1 (talk) 17:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Stages of growth model GA review
Please see my response to your GA review of Stages of growth model. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 15:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I have replied there. Nev1 (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I just wanted to make sure the matter was clear for the primary editors of the page: they're working on it for a school project and didn't seem very familiar with Wikipedia conventions. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Admin
Am I right in thinking that you've been offered a nomination before? If so, I wish for you to reconsider. I know we've not interacted that much and our occasional discussion has been limited to the project talk page but I've found your editing and communication skills are excellent; both traits I'm sure the community would love to see all administrators have. I hope you contemplate this offer and if you decline, it won't matter that much. :) Rud  get  11:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've not been offered a nomination in so many words before, but Jza84 and Malleus Fatuorum have both muttered that I should probably go for it. Hell, I accept. Well sort of, I won't have access to the internet from Friday afternoon to Sunday evening and since three days is a long time in polticis RfA I'd like to delay it until Monday. The bonus is, by then the FAC I have open at the moment should be closed. And most importantly: thanks for the offer to nominate me, I'm flattered there are people out there who trust the way I edit. Nev1 (talk) 22:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think I used the word "probably", but I do remember using the term "ego-bruiser". If you feel happy about whatever the outcome might be, then go for it; I'll certainly be lining up in the support column anyway. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You're right, "probably" was a bit strong. Well there's only one way to find out how it will go, and I promise not to let it affect me whatever the result. I didn't join wikipedia to get absorbed in admin. Nev1 (talk) 23:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've always been impressed by your "balls on the block" attitude. Good luck! --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * PS. One of the early complaints you're likely to get is that you don't archive this talk page, which, as Jza84 once complained about mine, is nearing biblical proportions. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Incredible, and that's supposed to effect how I use the tools! I'll sort this page out at some point. Nev1 (talk) 23:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * People look for reasons to oppose, not for reasons to support. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Nev, I won't patronise ya!... I'm sure you know what my thoughts would be on this! But I would reiterate what Malleus has said; RFA is comparable to a very fierce fire-breathing dragon, but if you go in with the right attitude, it's a great experience. I think you'd be an outstanding admin. :) --Jza84 |  Talk 00:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, by Monday though, I'll be away, so I'll get to writing the nomination in the next few hours. Regards, Rud  get  16:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Here it is. Drop me a line, as they say, on my talk page if you want anything changing or if there is anything incorrect. Rud get  17:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks fantastic, it's easy to forget how much time I've spent on wikipedia. The only comment I have is that are you trying to list all the FAs and GAs I've significantly contributed to? Because I think my edits to Manchester were fairly minor while the Dunham Massey, Buckton Castle, Warburton, Greater Manchester, and Warwick Castle GAs aren't mentioned. Wow, I feel big headed saying that...
 * Would it be a good idea to add my e-mail address to my account? I noticed you were going to send me an e-mail. Nev1 (talk) 18:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll make the suggested changes. Email is preferable in an admin, but use one that doesn't reveal your identity. Perhaps set up a googlemail or yahoo account? Rud  get  18:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Nev1 (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm ready to pounce on that RFA... with support of course!... And just when I thought I could try and catch up with Royton, I see this! --Jza84 |  Talk 20:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I gave Oldham a freebie with Castleshaw Roman fort... but we can't have Oldham catching up too much ;-) Nev1 (talk) 20:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It's on the way to me! --Jza84 |  Talk 20:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You're going to have to compete with Trafford Park as well Jza84, 'cos that's next on my hit list. I think Nev1 and I have you covered. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a reminder that RfA is a brutal and often senseless process, I got this oppose because I asked the admin why he'd blanked my RfA nomination page. If I was American, I might be inclined to say "go figure". But I'm not, so I won't. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note to self: editors are allowed to ask the deer in the headlights candidate questions, but the candidate is not expected to be so impertinent. Speaking of questions, do I fill in the three standard ones before or after the page is transcluded? Nev1 (talk) 00:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Before. And don't forget to update the nomination date end date to 7 days after you transclude it. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, lucky I asked. Nev1 (talk) 00:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So are you still on for tomorrow? Rud  get  18:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep, I might actually be able to do it tonight. I'll go and answer the questions... Nev1 (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good, good. If you need help with anything just ask (not that you will of course!) and make sure to brace yourself for the optional questions. Rud  get  18:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You've done brilliantly, looks like you'll be an admin in a matter of minutes! Good luck with the tools, thanks again for the honour of nominating you. Kind regards, Rud  get  19:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Nom - On Hold Promotion!
Hi. I reviewed your GA nom for Mamucium and put it on hold until some issues, mainly with the clarity, are resolved. You can see my recommendations on the bottom of the talk page. :) Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the speedy response. The article is much better, so I promoted to Good Article! :D Intothewoods29 (talk) 22:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much! Nev1 (talk) 23:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Castle plan.
Hi, I was thinking of creating a public domain plan of Warwick Castle, which would allow the fair use one in the article to be replaced. I just wanted to check that you did not have anything planned, I don't want to go stepping on any toes whilst a WP:FAC was underway. I also wondered if you know of any other sources of plans. I have a number of satellite photos (Google maps is particularly good), the only map source of the rooms I have is the image you uploaded. GameKeeper (talk) 21:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * That would be fantastic, thanks. I was going to ask Jza84 if he could knock something up, but he's got a lot on his plate and I haven't got round to it. And I'm hopeless with photoshop. I'm afraid the image I uploaded is the only half decent plan I could find online. I'm afraid I can't be more specific about which rooms are which either. Nev1 (talk) 21:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded a version to commons Image:Warwick Castle Plan.svg. Any feedback appreciated. I did manage to find a few extra plan sources. GameKeeper (talk) 20:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It's great, the colours certainly help. Thanks for being so quick. Where did you find extra sources? Nev1 (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added the to the image description. This is probably the best Some Account of Domestic Architecture in England. It has 2 really good images. Probably a source for the diagram you used, on page 5. Plus a great plan of the house on page 92. GameKeeper (talk) 20:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Nicely done! Nev1 (talk) 20:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

If you have the time ...
I know you're busy with Warwick Castle, but if you can spare a few moments could you take a quick look at Trafford Park? I know the lead needs to be expanded, but I prefer to do that at the end. The Governance and Decline regeneration sections still need a little bit more work, and of course a map would be nice ... hang on, I think I've answered my own question. Any other suggestions you have would be gratefully received—I've had this one on the back-burner for too long, so I'd like to see it finished, or at least at GA anyway. Thanks. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Warwick Castle has got plenty of support and should close soon (fingers crossed it'll be a promotion). I'll be happy to take a look. I might even be able to help, I'm sure I had a book on Trafford Park around here somewhere... Nev1 (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Excellent. We can't let that Jza84 catch up to Trafford with his Oldham articles. :-) I've been watching Warwick Castle's FAC, and (touch wood) it does look like it might be all over bar the shouting now. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * --I'm trying! Chadderton will be GA soon with some luck, and Lees, Greater Manchester will be a B-class! --Jza84 |  Talk 01:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Just seen that you've done it. Warwick Castle is now an FA. Congratulations! --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, it's great to know it's done. Nev1 (talk) 23:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Sale
Hi there! Just thought I'd let you know that there is a Sale set of photographs at Flickr that has suitable licencing for upload to commons. It is found here. They're not perfect, but they may be useful. I can trim or touch-up if you want me to. :) --Jza84 |  Talk 12:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * P.S. I restored a version of Image:The Square Shopping Centre, Sale.jpg, which I just learned was deleted at commons as a "Copyvio" (?!). It should be fine now - I have no idea why it was removed - it's fully sourced and appropriately licenced. --Jza84 |  Talk 14:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Some of the pictures look useful, I'll see if I can work them into the article. At the moment the 'economy' section could do with some colour! Nev1 (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Seeing as your RFA is going well, and you've not been found guilty of being an evil editor who shouldn't even be here (yet!)... there's some useful, new flicks here, here, and here too. The first two look particularly promising. :P --Jza84 |  Talk 15:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Jeez... Commons:Deletion requests/Image:The Square Shopping Centre, Sale.jpg --Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 20:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hopefully an open and shut case, but that was quick of them. Nev1 (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA
Best of luck for your RFA -- <em style="font-family:Kristen ITC;color:#ff0000"> Tinu  <em style="font-family:Kristen ITC;color:#ff0000">Cherian  - 13:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Nev1 (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

This is not the kind of thing you really ought to be saying during your RfA. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've finally been exposed! I expect the opposes to come flooding in now ;-) I was rather embarrassed to insult Richerman, I was muttering at my useless computer at the time and clearly got my wires crossed. Nev1 (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Editor has demonstrated no experience with, or understanding of, the Show preview button. Suggest that you wait three months until you've mastered the buttons already available to you before asking for more. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose and close per WP:SNOW, user can't be trusted with technology more complicated than pen and paper. Nev1 (talk) 19:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I was very tempted to post a faux-Uw-hblock here for this "outburst", but then thought that some might actually think you've been blocked!!... I don't think you'd forgive me if it stubbed out your RFA! :D --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 19:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's the thought that counts ;-) Nev1 (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Muse
No worries, mate. <font color="black" face="tahoma">Scarian Call me Pat!  14:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sale
Tell me about it... page numbers, boy. Not good. I mean the Oldham article will be a toughy as most of those books I had to get especially from the library! Even when I did a masters degree I didn't need to cite the page numbers! Oh well...

I'll take a look at things tonight for Sale, and I'll even look through my books for some factoids to add (I have a few pan-Greater Manchester books). Its looking very very healthy now though I have to say. Did you notice the links to geograph above, one of which has a free-to-use shot of (what I think is) the parish church? Might be handy. :) --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 15:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations on your RfA passing! Here are some useless useful links for you:


 * Administrators' reading list
 * New admin school

If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a line and I (or another experienced admin) will be more than happy to help you out.

Congrats again! EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 19:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC) (oh, and don't delete the Main Page)


 * Spoil sport ;-) And thanks, I'll take it nice and slow. Nev1 (talk) 20:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations from me too. It's well deserved. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * ...and from me - congrats! Craigy (talk) 08:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I dont know why your talkpage is on my Watchlist, but I saw how you'd been made an Admin. Congratulations! All the best! Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) ☺ 15:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Neither do I but thanks anyway! Nev1 (talk) 15:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Nev1, congratulations! However, you did not answer the last question on your RFA.  Please give an answer.  Thank you. Presumptive (talk) 03:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Sale refs
Hopefully fixed now: but they may need formatting. Lozleader (talk) 20:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I see there is a stub article Municipal Borough of Sale where all the obscure civic history might go, and which would allow you to trim down the governance section per the discussion here. Lozleader (talk) 07:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That's a good idea and would certainly address one of the points raised at the FAC, thanks I'll look into it at some point. Nev1 (talk) 10:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Greater Manchester
Why not comprimise with both? I do not see why the List of London is the benchmark. Can you point out why this is the case? (Archangel1 (talk) 20:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)).

Fair point. At least you had the common courtesy to reply in a recent manner. These list articles have numerous problems and this highlights it again. I do not agree with the answer but I've grown weary of trying to prove my point. (Archangel1 (talk) 20:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)).

Sale, Greater Manchester
Sorry to see that Sale still hasn't been promoted to FA, but it's surely close now. I think the copyediting effort was left too late, and I just haven't been able to spend the time I wanted to on it over the last few days. But after a couple of weeks timeout I'm sure we can get it through next time. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well you can't win 'em all. I thought we were a bit closer than the final result seems, but the third oppose tipped it over the edge. I thought Dweller was ready to become a supporter and epicadam's concerns had been mostly addressed. Ah well, a couple of weeks it is then. Nev1 (talk) 22:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've had a go at the Transport section, which seemed to be the straw that broke the camel's back during the FAC. What do you think? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "The town's first cinema, the Palace, ...". Wasn't it called The Palace? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The transport section reads a lot better, there's less repetition for starters. And you're right, it is meant to be The Palace. Nev1 (talk) 00:14, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Stockport
Yes, I do have a copy of Arrowsmith. I was reading it this week with that very task in mind. The task is complicated a bit by Stockport the town being utterly absorbed into Stockport the metropolitan borough - I can't find a modern map that shows the town. I don't get the time that I once did, but I'll try to come up with a decent section. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 18:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Trafford Centre
Sorry I can't be of more help, but I made most of that article from what was posted on their pages. However, it is highly likely to be the 4th largest, as the Westfield London is yet to be completed, so I'd use that for now. You may wish to contact User:Joshii as I believe he was the one who updated the figure for the Trafford Centre. Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 ( talk ) 16:26, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Castlefield
Hi Nev, I was rewriting the section on the fort and changing it to history, but when I tried to save it there was an edit conflict as you'd had the same idea. I've saved my bit under the heading of "History" but there may be some duplication, however a bit of editing should sort it out. I won't be doing much, more today but I'll probably get back to it tomorrow if I have time. Richerman (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem - I didn't lose the text for once! I'm packing up for now so if you want to do something with it, carry on - otherwise I'll have a go at it tomorrow. Richerman (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you open to recall? :-)
I can't believe this injustice!... It's OK, I've done it before myself. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 22:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Of all the dangerous buttons I get as an admin, I screw up with one anyone can get! How embarrassing! Sorry again, I thought I'd got used to rollback and how quick it is and then my hand slips. Nev1 (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem at all. Thanks for the swift revert of, um, Swift, on Denshaw. Probably a sock of User:Yorkshrian. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 15:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I noticed you thought it might be something to do with Yorkshirian. I was a bit dubious as I'm not sure three edits is enough to judge from, but I'm not very familiar with the case and the first edit by that account IMO wasn't the act of an inexperienced editor. Has Yorkshirian been pushing stuff to do with wind farms? Nev1 (talk) 15:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * He's confessed it's him at Requests for checkuser/Case/Riparder! He's just behaving stupidly again and I think it's just a bit of a strop in protest that I keep finding his socks and blocking them. With Denshaw he's just edit stalking; he recently harrassed User:MRSC in the same way which seems to have prompted that great user to retire, or at least take a break. Yorkie's turning his attention to me. I've started a threat at Administrators%27_noticeboard. The guy can't stop. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 15:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * This guy just doesn't give up! I'll keep an eye out for anyone reverting your edits (including myself at the moment!) etc and help if I can. Nev1 (talk) 15:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Quite. This guy is clearly has problems. On a simillar note, User:Archtransit was recently blocked as a sockpuppet too (although not connected with Yorkshirian!). Are there no real editors left here!? --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 16:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's just you and me; my army of sockpuppets against your army of sockpuppets. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * (ec) Archtransit was?? Good grief. I'm about to block User:Playa Delaya as a self-confessed sock of Yorkshirian; in the 'reason' box do I choose block evasion or sock puppet? Nev1 (talk) 16:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually I got confused with User:Archangel1! I think I'm losing the plot in this madhouse (I just blocked another admin mistakenly)! :S..... regarding reason, I wouldn't worry too much about it, both apply here (as well as harrassment and distruptive editting!). If its such a clear case of sockpuppetry, nobody will scrutenise the reason, I can assure you (we barely have time to these days!). I've also been told that with regards to Yorkie, WP:RBI is the way forwards, and I agree. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 16:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, by the time I made up my mind Keeper had finished mopping up. Archangel has been busy causing fuss over at the military history wikiproject. It's hard to keep track of everyone! RBI seems very wise at the moment. Nev1 (talk) 16:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's annoying because I don't want, nor have ever wanted to turn into a gaurdian for Wikipedia, blocking accounts on site, and locking out articles; it leads to the (percieved? - !) elitism of administrators, which Malleus has always been right to point out. I feel like WP:RBI is the equivalent to Marshall Law on WP. But, in the climate of unwillingness to rangeblock Yorkie and others, I suppose it's the best only tool we have. I'm going to continue to persue "guilty until proven innocent" with Yorkie - there could be cases of friendly fire, but the guy is pure evil. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 16:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a shame that you've found yourself in the frontline of this battle. We're all, even the most reluctant of us non-administrators, forced into being guardians of Wikipedia though; checking every IP edit to every article on our watch lists, reverting the incessant vandalism, issuing warnings, raising AN/I reports when necessary ... none of us signed up for that. What's worse, it drains our productivity. This English wikipedia has got to introduce some form of flagged revisions asap, if anyone can ever agree on anything here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK!
Thank you for your contributions! - Mailer Diablo 11:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC) Thank you for your contributions! - Mailer Diablo 17:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Endrick Shellycoat
Thanks for resolving the block situation - I didn't know where/how to do so. FYI my knowledge of WP comes from months of anon I-P editing at Scotland, (prior to the the protection), Flag of Scotland, Royal coat of arms of Scotland, (a few other Royal heraldry related articles), and Shanwick Oceanic Control. The protection placed at the Scotland article finally persuaded me to log in for the alternative was exclusion. Hope that allays any suspicions you may have. Endrick Shellycoat (talk) 08:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Anthony Burgess
Thank you so much. I've been trying very hard to get something done with this page, only to be called a vandal and be accused of ignorance. The page has everything needed to become a great page, but... You said it correctly, I am beginning to feel like I'm butting my head against a wall. It's clear the two IPs are related and not interested in doing anything to change the page. I appreciate your effort to protect the page, but more so, in voicing support. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I thought about doing something for the article myself, but it was frankly overwhelming and I had no idea where to start. Not to mention I have no sources. In my opinion, anyone willing to try needs all the support they can get. The state it's in, part of me thinks it would be best to just start from scratch in a sandbox. Hopefully a week will be long enough, but if the IPs return and start reinstating stuff I'll re-protect the page for a month. Nev1 (talk) 22:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It is overwhelming, and I've been asking myself why I even approached it. I'm not that informed regarding him, but then, as I said, why should I be to identify issues. If all of this is indeed pertinent, then it would be a great article if it covered how these trivial items relate to his work. "Burgess suffered from flatulence, an issue he endowed his character "blah" with in "Blah's Struggles." Burgess furthered the exploration of this malady in..." But the article doesn't do this. Unfortunately, the only equivalent I can think of would be Stephen King, who was quoted as working through the trauma from the hit and run that nearly killed him by writing From a Buick 8. That's citable. In any case, as it was, it presents as fancruft and hero worship, at least in my view. Thanks again. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:GM Newsletter
It's fantastic! Nothing's missed out in my opinion.... apart from (and we've discussed this before)... the possibility of running a recall - checking who is still active on WP. Bar that, I love the summary of each article and all the ideas you have about a space where we could talk about something we've worked on, are working on, or plan to work on.

I'm still toying with the idea of a North West England newsletter too really. Rationale being that the alternative set of eyes would help each other, and it would bond GM, Cheshire and (I must set this up this month) the Merseyside projects. Any thoughts on that? --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 23:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Ashton CC
I think Ashton CC has won the Wood Cup four times. See here. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 17:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah damn, I misread it as World Cup. I'll re-add it with the source. Thanks. Nev1 (talk) 17:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. Nev1 (talk) 17:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I misread it too at first. I only spotted it when I started to wonder why it hadn't been reverted earlier.  Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 17:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Templeborough
Hi. I normally wouldn't question pastscape as a source. However, I find the date of AD 43 for the establishment of the fort at Templeborough hard to believe. The main Roman invasion of Britain has only just begun in AD 43 and took them a number of years to push north. Pastscape is the only source that I have ever seen that dates Templeborough to AD 43. When I initially started the article, the consensus among online sources seemed to be AD 55 (see for example, , & ). This is around the time of the first military exchanges between the Brigantes and the Romans (see Brigantes). Other published sources (e.g., pp. 47–48) date the fort to around AD 70 when Quintus Petillius Cerialis began his campaign against the Brigantes. In truth I think that all sources are just speculating—so maybe it would be safest to give the date of establishment as the 1st century AD. Thanks, —Jeremy (talk) 20:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I wish Pastscape would be more reliable, I've found some inaccurate information on Pastscape before: one time it said a circular castle was square. If there are reliable sources giving other dates, I'd be inclined to rely on them. I prefer to use pastscape when no other source is available, but I wasn't looking hard for sources. IMO the 55AD date is what I'd go with as it is far back from the frontier established around 70AD when a series of forts along the northern frontier between the fortresses of Deva Victrix and Eboracum were built, but I think in this case "1st century" might be best. Nev1 (talk) 20:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I've edited it a little. Though my initial skepticism at AD 43 is weakening the more I read. The more scholarly the work, the less likely they are to put an actual date on Templeborough, but most seem to agree on pre-Falvian (narrowing it down to 43–68), with some narrowing it a little further to Neronian (54–68). —Jeremy (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm happy with the changes, what was really concerning me was the unsourced and tenuous connection with Jesus but I'm glad to see that you've removed it. There are a few Good Articles on Roman forts: Deva Victrix, Mamucium, and Castleshaw Roman fort (in descending order of size). Nev1 (talk) 11:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
--Smashville<sup style="color:#03F">BONK! 23:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Henry Taylor (swimmer)
Just want to let you know I am reviewing your article, Henry Taylor (swimmer), for GA. Regards, &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 19:20, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Bishop Auckland
Hi. Thanks for taking some time to look at and edit Bishop Auckland last week. I was wondering if you could give some advice on what work is likely to be needed to get the article to good article and beyond? Thanks again for your help Pit-yacker (talk) 17:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

List of railway stations in Greater Manchester
Hi Nev; yes, I think it's time to nominate at WP:FL. The main issue had been the lack of opening date of Manchester United Football Ground, but I managed to check this in the Butt book the other week. As far as I can see, everything in the list looks accurate, and the lead section seems to be suitable. Refs look OK as well. I'll let Joshii and Jza84 know (they created much of the content), and list it tonight or tomorrow. <font face="Helvetica"><font color="#00BFFF">Hassocks <font color="#228B22">5489 (tickets please!) 18:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

A big favour...
Hello there Nev1! I have a request and rather large favour to ask of you, admin-to-admin. I've been presented with a case of sockpuppetry, one which a checkuser has failed to provide a result. The case has been aptly put together here.

What I was hoping for is if you could spend a short time reading the case, and then get back to me with your thoughts (perhaps by e-mail if you prefer). I'm inclined to agree that this is a confirmed case of sockpuppetry, but as I've been involved, and I'm prepared to make the block, I wanted a second opinion. Could you help? I'll probably ask User:Ddstretch too. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 16:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll take a look straight away. Should I leave my thoughts on your talk page or the case page? Nev1 (talk) 16:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Either really. Mine perhaps? That way I'll know you've responded. Thanks Nev1. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 16:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I've zapped him. I think the evidence is/was overwhelming. These sorts won't stop at nothing though. Thank you ever so much for the review - I needed to make sure I wasn't compromised with my decision. :) --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 19:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, this is ThatsGrand. I would urge you to reconsider your decision. Their was no checkuser or official request made so I never got a chance to defend myself to very circumstantial and inaccurate evidence. I have posted some reasons for unblocking and may I just bring your attention to the fact that I have never once defied wiki policy or consensus. You'll see that there is no proof of that. I look forward to hearing from you.193.203.156.5 (talk) 21:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

(<-) Checkuser confirmed our suspicions - he was a sockpuppet of a long term abusive user. :) --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 11:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's reassuring to know we made the right call. Nev1 (talk) 12:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. I was confident that this gent was a sock.... with that over, I'm hoping to get back to WP:GM and aiding WP:MERSEY onto its feet. Once it is, it might be the right time to get a North West England newsletter/noticeboard up and running? - I'm not sure. Other than that, I really must get back to improving Chadderton (the article). Thanks again though, --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 13:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hugh Mason
Hi, I noticed your work to Hugh Mason, but wondered one thing: Stalybridge 1817, Lancashire or Cheshire? I'm unsure. :S --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 21:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not mentioned in the source I'm using, but vision of Britain says Cheshire so I've corrected it. If I can source the last couple of paragraphs from Mason's biography (about his marriage and family) I'm going to put the article forward at GAC. At this rate, it'll probably be tonight! I only picked up the book wondering if the was anyone from Ashton-under-Lyne who was missing from the notable people section, and I got completely distracted! There are a few interesting characters in the book who I'm thinking of writing articles for, such as Rayner Stephens and Robert Duckenfield. Those can wait though as Ashton-under-Lyne is more urgent. Nev1 (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * PS. The vision of Britain source is talking about the 1850s, but I can't imagine Stalybridge swapping between counties and it hopefully shouldn't be too contentious. Nev1 (talk) 21:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I've read (somewhere, a long time back) that the town straddled both counties. That said though, I believe most of it was in Cheshire. The Local Government Act 1888 definately placed it wholly in Cheshire though, but that's some half a century later.


 * The Ashton article could be an interesting one to bring up to B/GA status. I'll see if I can dig some facts up out of the books I've got to hand. :) --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 21:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * There's certainly plenty of potential for expansion for Ashton. I've had a go at filling in the early history of the town, although it really gets started in the Industrial Revolution. Nev1 (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Doesn't surprise me! I've still got my eye on Chadderton to fix up. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 22:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

(<-) Hello there!

As I see it, you're both right and yet, could be wrong too. Yes, these images are ancient and so copyright wouldn't normally apply, however, (and here's what I've been told in good faith), some groups assert that they own the copyright of the images by way of them being modern photographs, that happen to be of ancient work (if you follow), which is sneaky.

It might be worth asking an expert in that field though. I'm sure there's a fair use/copyright noticeboard on WP somewhere, that could help. --<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;border:2px solid #A9A9A9;padding:1px;">Jza84 | <font style="color:#000000;background:#D3D3D3;"> Talk 22:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Clifton Hall, Nottingham
Good job on that BTW. Definately haunted, I can tell by just looking at a place whether it is or not. See Borley Rectory too! <font style="color:#fef;background:black;">The Bald One     <font size="-4"><font color="Black">White cat 20:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)