User talk:Rushton2010

May take while to reply - not online much at the moment.

Real life takes priority.

http://www.macmillan.org.uk/Donate/

January 2014
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Broadway Media Centre a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 07:22, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shelford Priory, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Moiety, Saint Katherine and Rauceby (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) 09:04, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

How to react on confusing interference in the article on PINK de Thierry
Dear Rushton, An editor named https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Miniapolis interfered in the article on PINK de Thierry. And i think that his changes don't do any good to the article at all. How do i have to react on this? Just undo it? I don't even think that his so-called improvements are worth to duscuss. So what do you advice me?? Thank you in advance, Donald Donald.louw 15:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donald.louw (talk • contribs)
 * Please assume good faith User:Miniapolis is an admin with a lot of editing experience and meticulous copyediting skills. He is a member of the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors and the article has been greatly improved by his "interference". Theroadislong (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Buckfast Abbey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page River Avon (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) 09:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

A bit of help
Hi Rushton2010, I apologize if my question repeat something that has already been asked, I am trying to figure my way around Wikipedia and it's a bit confusing.

You have reviewed an article that we have submitted awhile ago and I am trying to figure out what to do to improve it. Can you help me out? This is the page that I am talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stjudepr

Since it is my first time logging in the account ( the article was submitted by someone else and I had no access to this account prior today), I just want to know what needs to be fixed so we can move along with posting the page. Any help will be appreciated! Thank you, Saint Jude Retreats

( PS: I already submitted a request for changing the username, I asked in the forum and I was advised to do so) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stjudepr (talk • contribs) 20:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Rushton2010_reported_by_User:ERIDU-DREAMING_.28Result:_.29

WikiProject Articles for creation March 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive
 Hello Rushton2010:

WikiProject AFC is holding a  month long Backlog Elimination Drive!

The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Posted by on 02:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation

Disambiguation link notification for February 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Vamps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Midlands (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) 09:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Black Adder I ---> Princes in the Tower and the ePetition for DNA testing
Was watching pilot of The Black Adder, The Foretelling, and bounced around refreshing my memory of the Battle of Bosworth and who the heck is Brian Blessed playing (King Richard IV of England who???) but finally got interested in why they haven't DNA tested the possible skeletons of the boys bodies. Looks like the e-petition at Her Majesties Government website has been closed without reason some months before the 12/02/2014 expected closing date. Sent an email response asking and will see what they say. It's a shame but this article in The Guardian explains the motivations of her majesty and the church. I went back through the history and found that you had first inserted the sentence about the ePetition so figured I would let you know. Alatari (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

To an old friend and ally
Hi Rushton. Hope you are well. If you have nothing better to do - and I am sure you have!! - but if you have a spare minute or two can you cast an editorial eye over a couple of my pages - Kevin Howarth and Simon Rumley - and see what you think. I have been having some disagreements about notability and references - again! - and would value an opinion from a fellow Wikipedian I know to be trustworthy and commonsensical. Feel free to maker any edits you think might improve either Picknick99 (talk) 18:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews
Hello. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular. The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered. If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.) If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with. Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors. I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC). Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity
Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion regarding the titles of the Faberge egg articles
There is a discussion taking place on the talk page of the article Red Cross with Triptych egg (discussion located here) regarding how we should title that article and the other articles on the various Faberge eggs. Since you appear to have been involved in the creation and/or significant writing of at least one of these articles, you may have some thoughts to share on the topic. Please consider reviewing and commenting on the discussion. Thank you! KDS4444 (talk) 20:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Monasteries in Greater Manchester
Template:Monasteries in Greater Manchester has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:45, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Kathe Perez article
I notice you reviewed the Kathe Perez article upon its creation at AfC. I was wondering if you had any insight into whether it ought to be kept or deleted, given some issues long flagged as problematic: the independence of the sources used (seem promotional), the tone of the article (again, promotional or unnecessarily positive), and also the notability of the subject (per WP:GNG and WP:PROF). TheFeds 10:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Garendon Hall
First, noting the banner at the top of this page and the fact that you haven’t edited for a fair while, I hope you are well. I just wanted to thank you for the terrific Pevsner quote on Garendon Hall. “Really rather horrible” caused me to spit my coffee over the keyboard! But he wasn’t wrong. I see that Mark Girouard suggests that the Triumphal Arch at Garendon may be the first building in England to draw directly from an Ancient Roman source. Definitely an article in there, with clear DYK potential. With all best wishes. KJP1 (talk) 14:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)