User talk:The Roman Candle

Cheshire
I'd recently noticed that you edit Cheshire related articles. Would you be interested in joining the Cheshire WikiProject? It's a group of editors with a common interest in Cheshire, with the aim of improving coverage of the county on wikipedia and helping each other out. The project's talk page is where people bring their problems with articles or ask for help or advice from a wider audience than an article talk page (although they are still important for the bulk of discussion). Whether you decide to join or not, you're welcome to drop by and enter the discussion, and happy editing! Nev1 (talk) 20:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the project! At the moment, there's no specific aim, or collaboration the project is working on, but if you leave messages on the project talk page on any issues, members will try to help. Is there any particular area you're interested in? There's a variety of interests among project members, such as User:Peter I. Vardy does a lot of work on churches and listed buildings, and at the moment, I'm reading about Cheshire's castles in an attempt to give them better coverage on wikipedia. Nev1 (talk) 20:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There's nothing wrong with what you did at the Winterley page, as far as I'm concerned you were just being bold; and considering the argument that was going on, it was a brave thing to do. One way or another the article couldn't stay as it was, on it's own Winterley doesn't really seem notable, and I was probably going to agree with the proposed merge, but expanding the scope of the article is an interesting third way. Also, since it's already been established (I think) that Wheelock Heath is split across two boroughs (at least until 1st April) it may kill two birds with one stone by addressing the issue about whether Winterley is partly in Congleton or not. Nev1 (talk) 21:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dave Snowden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BA (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) 11:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Northern Ireland flags issue, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St Andrew's Cross (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) 11:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

European English
If it can't be deleted, than perhaps a redirect. What to would be the question, I guess - I don't know how many potential target-articles there are. I suggest you ask talk for advice - he's an admin and very knowledgeable and sensible. PiCo (talk) 13:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=623874518 your edit] to Macclesfield 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) 16:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The town is famous for its once thriving silk industry, commemorated in the Silk Museum.
 * home, and the town has been a hub previously with the now all but defunct US companies Mforma which was renamed Hands-On Mobile and I-Play (acquired by Oberon Media) both having had

Historical name
When the Rathlin Island Massacre took place it happened off of Ireland, Northern Ireland didnt exist at the time, and as per MOS we use historical accurate names. For context we can say after the historical name the modern name WP:WAIN covers this. But would that make it any clearer or would it improve the article? Murry1975 (talk) 19:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * As you say, Northern Ireland didn't exist at the time, hence the use of "what is now" Northern Ireland. This statement is entirely accurate and gives the reader a good steer as to where precisely we are talking about. Not sure how WP:WAIN relates to it. That seems to be about admin stuff. Anyway, why not put it to Talk? I have reverted it again, but won't do so any more if you want to discuss it further. The Roman Candle (talk) 19:31, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Read the link. It says we use historical accurate info. WP:WIAN, wrong way around. Murry1975 (talk) 19:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * So which statement in that essay are you concerned about? The Roman Candle (talk) 19:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Ping!! Please explain what your concerns are, and how my edit conflicts with the WP:WIAN advice; I can't see it. The Roman Candle (talk) 11:16, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Very easy, we use HISTORIC names, Byzantium, Gaul and Ireland, for places, we could then qaulify this with additional information if it leads to clarity. BTW essay? What essay, thats a guideline. Murry1975 (talk) 11:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * FYI, I've taken it to the article Talk page. The Roman Candle (talk) 12:48, 16 September 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) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)