User talk:Oldnoccer

License tagging for File:WrightsEngine.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:WrightsEngine.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stuart Turner (engineer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joseph Day (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Slipper crossheads.
I thought the Stuart Turner 10V went to a trunk guide so that it could be bored in a lathe, rather than the perennially tricky problem on making a good flat surface (or levelling a casting to support one from gauge plate). Andy Dingley (talk) 11:59, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Have added a comment as clearly the trunk guides are easier on a lathe, though was trying to bring out that ST made engines of similar size with different crossheads reflecting full sized practice where a slipper guide was used for uni-directional (though providing some support for overrun and occasional reverse, e.g. marine), and guide supports with equal area (such as guide bars or trunk) were used where engine could be run in either direction. The 10H with trunk guide, and the S50 with guide bars being some of the most commonly made. Mistakenly commented that I had added a link for the early 10H, when should have said 10V.

Your submission at AfC Oldnoccer/Hazlewood's Limited was accepted
 Oldnoccer/Hazlewood's Limited, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=600425869 your edit] to Blackburne (motorcycles) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * of their 350 bike to overhead camshaft, and managed to get a speed record of 100mph in 1924 see Dougal Marchant. The 350cc Blackburne engine then became avaialble on Chater-Lea bikes

Meadows family connections?
Is there any connection between Henry Meadows and Robert Meadows, Lord Mayor of Liverpool some time in the early '70s? He was connected with the motor trade and (our family was in haulage and had connections) I'd always had a vague memory that he was an offshoot of the engine building Meadows family. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:02, 28 April 2014 (UTC)


 * On the subject of Meadows, I'd be wary of calling a Meteor by 1944 a "Rolls-Royce" rather than a "Rover" (although this is complicated). The only good source I know on Meteors (a surprisingly thin corpus) is the small RRHT book. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

No idea on Meadows Geneaology. Read the book on the Cromwell tank I referenced, it was the source for my statement that Meadows manufactured Meteor engines. I am aware that Rover were also involved, but that is not mentioned in that source. I think both were potentially shadow factories. I would like to knoiw who made the Meteorite - maybe that was Rover. The most fabulous name for an engine ! I used the term Rolld Royce Meteor to link to the Wkipedia page which is of that name.
 * There's a rather famous meeting (end of 1942) where R-R swapped their Meteor work for Rover's jet engine work (this is how R-R began with gas turbines). After this, the engine is better named the Rover Meteor and was badged as such.
 * Meteor production is an odd thing. It was designed from the outset to be recycled from Merlins, either production scrap or rebuilt from crashed engines. Much of the complex initial production of them still came from Merlin production lines, including the shadow factories. In time, the construction changed and moved away from the Merlin design, but there were still lots of common components and these were still being sourced from the Merlin rework lines. An out-of-tolerance component for high power use in aircraft was often still usable for the low power, unblown tank engine. The Meteor engine itself (which was never in such volume as the Merlin) was built (or re-built) by a range of factories, including Rover, Morris, Meadows and Leyland but these weren't named as "Meadows Meteors" until long after the war, when the whole thing became a Leyland product under their name.
 * Complicated story and the WP coverage is very poor at present. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I think there is the basis of an interesting TV program on the control exercised by the Ministry of Supply during WW2. The information is probably available from the National Archives at Kew, but it will take a researcher some time to stitch it all together. I have an interest in the production of lathes at the time, especially precision lathes which had previously generally been imported. I know of one company forced to relocate from Portsmouth to Frome to free up factory space in the port, and then turned from making industrial machines to glider landing gear, there must have been hundreds of similar changes all over the country. I have also recently been reading about the similar situation in WW1, where in Nov 1916 the Ministry blocked all car and motor cycle production without a permit - and the permits were only available for military purposes - so no one could buy a new motor cycle or motor car for over 2 years. Any spare capacity not used for military vehicles was used for munitions or aircraft parts. However the story was simpler in that the UK didn't suffer the same sort of mass bombing in WW1 that we got in WW2. I have added a mention of Rover to the Meadows piece, I will try and find some more suitable wording, however there is little doubt they made the two flat-12 tank engines mentioned, and they substantially extended the plant to do it, so they were well placed to participate in subsequent engine manufacture. It didn't occur to me they might stick a Meadows badge on it, but its a Rolls-Royce design, originally made by them too, so I could happily see someone refer to a Rover-made Rolls-Royce Meteor. Take the Bristol Blenheim aircraft, it was made by Bristol, Avro, Rootes and also VLT in Finland (45 made) and 16 by Ikarus in Yugoslavia - but they were still all know as Bristol Blenheims, you won't find anyone calling them Avro Blenheims, even if there is an Avro builders label on them.
 * This is Wikipedia, and the sources come from Derby. Have you seen the amount of renaming for jet engines, to rename them as R-R engines?! Each of the engine makers had a theme for their names, so de Havilland were paranormal: Gnome, Bristol mythological: Orpheus Olympus & Pegasus – Wikipedia renames them all as R-R. The Armstrong-Siddeley Sapphire seems to survive untouched, even though A-S were as much a part of R-R post-'68 as any of Bristol were. The Armstrong-Siddeley Beryl isn't even recognised here as WP keeps it as a Metrovick engine, even though it was only ever the F.2 in their hands.
 * One of my neighbours in North Bristol still had the original workshop of 1900 or so in their back garden. Gas engine powered, lineshaft driven and with the receipt books for fuze production during the Great War. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

TS3 in 1914
Thanks for the image of the Simpson engine. Never heard of that one, fascinating! Andy Dingley (talk) 11:10, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I have been unable to find any more information than in that brief article. It was being experimented upon at Eagle Works, Cable St, Blackburn and I know there was a Spead Eagle pub in Cable Street, but a local council official with historical records wasn't able to find mention of Eagle Works or tell me if Simpson was the company, or whether it was another company and Simpson engine refers to a design or patent. Couldn't locate this design in a patent either. Frustrating, but very TS3-like. Dr S Richardson (talk) 11:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Contributions to Wilson-Pilcher‎ article
Many thanks and heartfelt compliments on the quality of your contributions to the Wilson-Pilcher‎ article. All I had time to do was import/translate the German article. What you have done has brought the article to a whole new level. Well done me old Noccer! &#32;  Djapa Owen (talk) 12:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. I was a bit worried it was getting to look like a Haynes manual, but some aspects of the design are ground breaking. Wilson was a significant engineer, and but for his untimely death Pilcher could have competed with the Wright Brothers for first powered flight (using Wilson's flat-twin engine), so recording the Wilson-Pilcher car is a way to commemorate both. The Automotor Journal actually shows all the separated components of the epicyclic gears and clutch, but I thought that was going a bit far. I might add something on the lubrication and cooling at some point, but don't intend to take it much further. Plenty more interesting engineering to research.Dr S Richardson (talk) 07:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I wonder if those diagrams and mention of the Wilson-Pilcher might be worth adding to the Epicyclic gearing article? &#32;  Djapa Owen (talk) 12:02, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Epicyclic gearing was commonplace in motor cycle and bicycle hub gears back then, not sure if this is the first application to a large car gearbox. May need a bit more research. (http://www.oldbike.eu/museum/bike-i-d/early-hubs-gears/) Dr S Richardson (talk) 23:39, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Körting engines
Rankin Kennedy's books are a good English-language source for these. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Körting made a lot of regular engines as well as the unusual double acting ones, so need to untangle them. I have several old engine books that refer to the double acting one, so need to re-read those. Dr S Richardson (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Crossley Motors (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Crystal Palace


 * Dan Albone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Waverton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Marcos 1800 series
I would like to write an entry on the Marcos 1800 and its various successors down to the Mantula or so but don't know what to name it? I originally considered "Marcos GT", but that would really only truly refer to the Ugly Duckling (which was also nicknamed "Luton Gullwing" but that was never its official name). According to this seemingly trustworthy site ALL Marcos cars before the Mantis carried the name "Marcos GT." My best suggestion is Marcos 1800 series and then to make redirects for the other possible names such as Marcos 3-litre etcetera, but maybe you could think of something better? The naming guidelines for WP suggest always going for the original name of a car unless another name is demonstrably better. Cheers, looking forward to any suggestions,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  03:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Having looked at some more opinions elsewhere, perhaps Marcos GT (Adams) to set it apart from the earlier, Costin-designed jobs? Or perhaps Marcos coupé? Vague but not offensively so, would be my favorite if it wasn't for the later convertible versions. Or just call it Marcos Mantula and add on the previous generations - they can always be split off later if there is too much content. Night,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  03:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Your note seems a bit confusing to me, as there is already a Marcos (Automobile) page that covers all the models you are talking about, but I am guessing that you are wanting to create a page in a different language - which is an aspect of Wikipedia with which I am not familiar. I don't have original advertising literature from the early part of the company history, but I have 1980s literature that refers back to their earlier models. They call the first model the 'Marcos 1800'. In 25th anniversary literature I have it simply refers to the older cars as the Marcos 1.6 OHC, The Marcos 2.0 OHC, the Marcos 3 litre, etc. The emphasis is that the same car can accommodate a wide range of engines, so basically there is one model, and different engines. In the 30th anniversary sales literature the models available are the Marcos Mantula Coupe, Marcos Mantula Spyder, Marcos SE30, Marcos 2 litre Spyder, and Marcos 2 litre Coupe, but by then they were selling complete cars ready for final assembly (component cars) and were on the verge of full factory production (all cars were factory built after the Mantula). I think by then they had decided to have different model names and a fixed specification - very different from the days of selling kits and owners installing engines from donor cars. Dr S Richardson (talk) 12:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and no I was looking to create an entry only for the Adams-designed Marcos Coupé/Spyder range - Marcos (automobile) is a company history in its entirety and also includes the Mantis and Mini Marcos and all of the others, which have their own stand alone articles. I was simply wondering whether you had a good suggestion for a name that embraces all of the 1800 and descendants. Cheers,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  16:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The Costin/Adams-designed Marcos Coupe/Spyder range covers the large proportion of Marcos production. Assuming you don't worry about the change to steel chassis in 1969, the same chassis can be found in all cars through to the Mantis (there was a minor change to the distance between the top rails in the engine bay for the Mantis), and if you look at the Mantis body you can see the centre section is the original design, the wings have grown to accomodate wider and wider track - a process that started with the Mantula having wider rear axles, then the Mantara having wider front axles, and so on. So I don't think it is appropriate to have a separate section when it is for the bulk of Marcos cars, it would make more sense to update the current Marcos cars entry. What is missing from Wikipedia is an article on the Adams brothers and a summary of the designs they came up with, which includes the various Probe models (which do have Wikipedia entries). Frank Costin is covered by a Wikipedia page, and something similar either for the Adams brothers or for Dennis and Peter Adams separately would be a very useful link between existing information.Dr S Richardson (talk) 08:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Additional - The Adams brothers were involved in building the Marcos Xylon (but not its design it seems), and in the design of the Gullwing, the Fastback, the mantis M70, the 1962 XP (never produced) and the XP Mantis racer. In fact it seems the Xylon and Mini-Marcos are the only Marcos cars they didn't design up to the point where Marcos went bakrupt in 1971 (Mini Marcos was designed by Malcolm Newell). The design was evolved after Marcos came back in 1983, but pretty sure that was without their involvement.Dr S Richardson (talk) 09:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Hullo, and thanks for your thoughtful input. I decided on making an article called Marcos GT (I have a few more sources to cite still, and I imagine you could add a thing or two). Taking your points into account I decided to make the entry cover all cars (using this design) from 1964 until 1972 (it seems that some final cars, including all the Mk2 1600s, were built by Hebron & Medlock Bath Engineering in the half-year that they ran Marcos, meaning that some cars were at least finished in early 1972 after which Rob Walker sold everything off) and also including the non-V8 kits built until circa 1990. You wouldn't happen to have a source or some knowledge on the definite end date for the pre-Mantula Marcos GT, do you? Both 1989 and 1990 are bandied about.


 * Anyhow, not including the Mantula (nor later cars) seems like a logical break point. And now we can simply go in there filling in content for Marcos Mantula, Marcos LM-series, Marcos Mantaray, and Marcos TS. I hope you approve of my efforts thus far. Cheers,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  02:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)


 * You are correct in that the Marcos GT was the name used for all of their early cars, as I have just looked through the Marcos book of Road Tests 1960 to 1997, and the two 1960 road tests for the Frank Costin 'ugly duckling' Marcos both refer to the 'curiously shaped sports coupe' as the "Marcos GT". The same for the 1962 road test on the gull-wing - the test is titled 'Marcos GT', but when the 1800 came out the tests call it the Marcos 1800, the 1600 is referred to as the Marcos 1600, and then in 1968 a couple of road tests refer to the Marcos 1600 GT - after that no road tests use GT in the name of any Marcos model. You don't seem top have brought out the point that these were mainly kit cars right from the start, you bought a body and chassis, and you used axles, engine, gearbox from donor cars, though Marcos might sell you some Triumph suspension, or a tuned Ford engine. The reason for this was to avoid purchase tax - TVR started just the same. The last of the kits was probably the Martina in the 1990s, which was designed to have the front suspension, engine, and a lot of other parts taken from a Cortina donor car. Like the mantula the bodywork had been changed. In the case of the Martina the front wings and bonnet were changed to allow for the McPherson struts, and the chassis changed to meet the Cortina front subframe. The Mantara, on the other hand, was only factory built, as were all models that followed. As the road tests call the pre-1800 cars the GT, but don't use this for the 1800, then maybe just call the page Marcos 1800, and restrict yourself to the 1800s. These do have a special value to collectors because they are eligible for classic race events, and because the wooden chassis is so unusual, though the earlier GTs are also eligible, and also have a wooden chassis.

Commons
Btw, your photos are excellent and you clearly only upload useful ones. Currently WP is trying to assemble all of their media files (including photos) at the Wikimedia Commons. It's the same as here, except it allows users across all languages to use your photos. I would recommend that you upload your shots there; this will save various volunteers the time necessary to re-upload your photos so as to be used in other language areas of Wikipedia. Cheers again,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  02:47, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Starter (engine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lanchester. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

British Library Patent Definition
Hi, I was hoping to piggyback on your research into British Patent and copyright law, as indicated in your posting here: File:1908 Scott Motorcycle Patent.jpg. Do you have a link to the British Library document which makes the statement "A patent is a contract between an inventor and a state. The inventor puts a detailed description of his invention into the public domain and in return the state grants him the right to prevent anyone else exploiting his invention for a limited period of time." ? If not, if you could point me in the right direction, I'll take a look myself to nail this down.

The reality is, as this is a patent from 1908, and the author himself died in 1923, there's a good chance that governing copyright law (to the extent it applies) has already dropped the artwork into the public domain in the UK. However, worldwide there's an argument to be made that the copyright is protected for another 6 years, especially in France which recognizes an authors moral rights outside of governing copyright laws. But for the purposes of UK & US copyright which primarily pertain to this patent artwork, there's likely a good case to be made that it's in the PD regardless of what British Patent law dictates. Closettrekker (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Reply

 * I have to admit there has been too much water under the bridge for me to recall where I got that from, and I am beginning to wonder if I found a UK source citing the US view on patents. I remember struggling with the issue of patent copyright at the time, but its not my specialist field by any means, and I think is far from simple, and different country by country. Also sometimes the inventor will issue the a patent for the same invention in several countries under different laws. I have just looked into this further and found comments by the IPO in response to a question as follows ...
 * The ownership of the copyright in patent specifications changed with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The rules are as follows:
 * Patent specifications published before 1 August 1989-


 * Copyright in these belongs to the Crown but in normal circumstances no steps would be taken to enforce that copyright (notice of this was given in our Official Journal (Patents) on 25 June 1969). You would be allowed to copy these patent specifications freely but on the understanding that if the privilege is abused, for instance by copying for the purpose of selling them on, then the government may take action.


 * Patent specifications published on or after 1 August 1989-


 * After the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) came into force, Copyright in patent specifications belonged to the applicant/proprietor (the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) though may copy and publish these as required by sections 16 and 24 of the Patents Act). The copying and issuing of copies to the public of patent specifications for the purposes of ‘disseminating information’ is also not an infringement of copyright. A notice of this general authorisation of such copying appeared in our Official Journal on 5 December 1990.


 * This means that you may freely copy UK patent specifications for the purpose of ‘disseminating the information contained in them’. If you were to copy the whole or a substantial part of the specification for any other purposes, such as marketing or sales, this could be an infringement of the copyright (unless the use fell within one of the exceptions to copyright).


 * So from this it looks like there is no problem using information from 1989 or later UK patents, but that similar publication of information from earlier UK patents is something tolerated under crown copyright. There is also the issue of whether an artwork within a patent is copyright of the artist, though I think engineering drawings only came to be copyrightable works in the 1956 patent act. I think there is provision for artwork to have a copyright notice within a patent, and presumably therefore have the normal expiry term that would apply to any artwork outside a patent (70 yrs after death I think). However I think any original artwork has an implicit copyright, so maybe the inventor (pre 1988) used to sign over the copyright to any artwork when the patent is issued. As it seems the Intellectual Property Office has a mechanism for handling queries, it might be an idea to contact them and use the Scott diagram as an example and see what they say. From what I quoted above it is not clear whether the publication for the purposes of disseminating information is an exception that extends to earlier patents. The 1988 act no doubt explains it, but I think it is huge ! Dr S Richardson (talk) 12:51, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Dayton Motorised Bicycle.jpg
Please provide additional information, such as the name of the author/photographer and their lifetime, so that potential re-users in countries not following the rule of the shorter term can determine when any remaining copyright in this image expires for them.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Dick Kerr & Co Petrol Electric Locomotive.jpg
Please provide additional information, such as the name of the author/photographer and their lifetime, so that potential re-users in countries not following the rule of the shorter term can determine when any remaining copyright in this image expires for them.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:40, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

The Polynesian
I'm presuming this is a newspaper. Would you please use cite news when adding shipwrecks to the various lists. If it's a journal, then cite journal is the one to use. Mjroots (talk)
 * Happy to use that if I can figure it out - none of the wreck examples I looked at used it. Does it go instead of the 'ref'. in addition to the 'ref', within the 'ref'? The help page isn't clear on that. How anyone is supposed to be aware of the millions of these templates and which should be used where is beyond me, it definitely discourages people like me from adding information to have to unravel the use of nested templates. I would say The Polynesian was a newspaper from its content and format (weekly, single broadsheet), but in July 1844 it became 'the official journal of the hawaiian government'. However it looks like cite journal is intended solely for scientific journals, and not journals in general. One of my relatives was involved in the rescue of the crew of the Saginaw after it was wrecked in the Pacific in 1870 (he was chief engineer on the steamer Kilauea), and in looking that up I found many records of ships lost which might usefully be added to Wikipedia. http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82015408/ Dr S Richardson (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The easiest way is to name the ref. If it was a weekly publication then name it after the template. Other parameters may be used as appropriate, but that covers the most commonly used parameters. Further uses of a reference from that paper would be cited by using  . Cite journal is used for magazines, journals etc as well as scientific journals. Further info about referencing can be found at WP:REFB. Mjroots (talk) 20:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I've made an edit to the 1825 list which should make the above clearer for you. Mjroots (talk) 20:19, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the example - that makes it clear. I don't normally name references unless there is likely to be more than one reference to the same source on a single page. I was just reading about the wreck of the mail steamer Tweed in 1847 and the remarkable skills used by the 79 who were not drowned to survive on a reef for many days where there was no dry land at all. I'll try including URLs within the news templates for those who might want to read the full story - there are often many accounts as first the news is relayed, then the rescue details emerge, then the survivors and captains accounts are published, and often the great bravery of the rescuers is rewarded too (the Spanish rescuers of the Tweed's survivors were recognised and rewarded in parliament). Dr S Richardson (talk) 08:41, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, urls are useful where there is free access to a digitized copy. Less useful for stuff that needs a subscription. Naming refs is a habit I've got into, as doing so makes it easier if further information is discovered later which fits within the existing text. If a ref isn't used more than once, no harm is done by naming it, but it isn't wrong not to name it. Mjroots (talk) 11:39, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

American flag
Hi, you may not be aware, but there are specific flag aliases to call up different flags. For the United States, Template:Country data United States gives the details of which to use to produce the correct flag for the period in question. Further details also at Flag_of_the_United_States. Using an alias that doesn't exist produces the basic flag by design, this includes typos. For example, Hamburg produces  Hamburg instead of the correct  Hamburg  Hamburg. Appreciate there's a lot to learn, and in most cases readers probably won't notice anyway but there this inner perfectionist in me yelling. Don't worry too much, I'll probably pick up any errors as I work through the lists in due course. Mjroots (talk) 11:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not clear on when you use flag and when you use flagcountry. I am attempting to copy from other examples, but for some countries when examples are harder to find (like Chile) I am just happy if I get some sort of Chilean flag as I am ignorant of whether their flag changed over time or whether merchant marine and naval flags differ from the national flag. Some things I have to leave to others.
 * flag links directly to the country article. flagcountry links to an article, but displays a different (i.e. "common") name. Taking the United Kingdom as an example 🇬🇧 United Kingdom produces 🇬🇧 United Kingdom, whereas undefined produces  undefined, which links to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland article, but displays the link as United Kingdom. In this instance, the shortcut UKGBI was created to save typing. You might find User:Mjroots/Flags useful for Europe and South America. I must complete the North America section and then do Africa and Asia. Mjroots (talk) 12:06, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Whaleships wrecked in the Arctic
You should read Whales, Ice, and Men by John Bockstoce. It's the standard work on commercial whaling in the Western Arctic (Bering Straits region). ST1849 (talk) 18:40, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, the accounts of strandings on atolls and enormous voyages to get rescued are quite enthralling, however my main reason for looking through the papers of that era was a relative of mine sailed to Hawaii from the UK in 1865 and became chief engineer on the ferry steamer between the Hawaiian Islands (until 1872). I was more interested in the makeup of the community there that inspired him to take a 142 day voyage with wife and two young children. I began to realise their world was dominated by the arrival of sailing ships, both commercial whalers and barques from as far away as Hong Kong, Australia or Liverpool (more locally San Fransisco), which brought all manner of goods. The accounts of ship losses I thought might have a place on Wikipedia so I entered several of them when they cropped up in the Hawaii papers.Dr S Richardson (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ministry of Supply, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Ministry_of_Supply check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Ministry_of_Supply?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jones, Turner and Evans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tranmere ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Jones%2C_Turner_and_Evans check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Jones%2C_Turner_and_Evans?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:SYKOCipherDevice.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SYKOCipherDevice.jpg, which you've attributed to Niall McLaughlin. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:07, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited British military narrow-gauge railways, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hayes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Oldnoccer

Thank you for creating William Boulton (engineer).

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 22:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Oldnoccer. Thank you for your work on Martin Mill military railway. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;    (contact)   11:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Coedpoeth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Whim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

July 2023
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, Oernant Tramway, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it has been moved to Draft:Oernant Tramway where you can continue to work on it. Please consider using the Article Wizard or the Articles for Creation procedure. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read "Your first article". You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 22:45, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Marshall tractors
Hi, you are doing superb job on these pages, just a reminder to add citations from the sources you obviously have access to. Thanks Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:06, 26 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi - Thanks, I subscribe to the British Newspaper archive (£100/year), it gives me access to a lot of information, which I can cite, but I don't offer the urls as a subscription is required to view. I hope to fill in gaps in the information on wikipedia where I can. I prefer to cite information directly rather than cite info from books or websites written many years later, though I do use both. I was really surprised to find the evidence that it was the TRW racing car group that baled out Track Marshall - but there it was in the newspaper. Dr S Richardson (talk) 11:28, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Just a comment, the British Newspaper Archive is accessible from a number of public libraries. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Oldnoccer. Thank you for your work on Oernant Tramway. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;   (contact)   12:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Avonside Locomotive Works
Hi, I found your article on Avonside Locomotive Works as I am in Taipei and there is one of their trains on display here, in the 228 Peace Park. It was apparently active in Japan for 30 years before being brought to Taiwan. Thought you may be interested as it is missing from the list of specimens on the wiki page. Best, J 59.120.15.144 (talk) 11:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. I have added it to the page - it deserves special mention as the oldest surviving locomotive. I see it is already in the tabulated list of preserved locomotives. I did not discover the make and age of the other locomotive in display in the Peace Park. Taiwan Loco No 1. Dr S Richardson (talk) 21:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)