User talk:Dave.Dunford

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hayfield[edit]

Dave, I feel we're about to enter an editing war regarding the Hayfield entry. To explain my position, I live in the village and I've been writing for Wikipedia since it first started. As a resident, I know many local people in Hayfield and am aware of most local references. I regularly walk the hills and know the OS map like the back of my hand. With this in mind:

  • Kinder Scout: This is considered locally as a mountain. Ordnance Survey refer to it as a mountain. Local people are proud that it's a mountain! To edit the Hayfield entry to say otherwise is to insert your own point of view. Please don't do that. Yes, to all intents and purposes it's a big hill. But it's classed as a mountain, even if it's an unimpressive one :)
  • Lantern Pike: I and many others have not heard of the term "outlier". Indeed, I had to get a real-life dictionary out to find out what the term means. Most online references (including Wikipedia's own) refer to "outlier" in the mathematic sense. Now that I do know what it means, I have to ask you provide evidence that Lantern Pike is actually an outlier. Maybe you can create an entry for Lantern Pike, and cite references? Anything else is, again, point of view editing. I really think you should change this reference in the Hayfield entry to something more easy understood, and more informal, as is the style of the rest of the Hayfield entry. 86.135.160.199
Discussion copied to (and continued at) Hayfield discussion page. Dave.Dunford 11:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Comma butterfly[edit]

Hi. Nice picture of a comma butterfly. Zeimusu | (Talk page) 01:21, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks - have only recently discovered Wikipedia and am glad to have a useful outlet for pictures I've previously only taken for my own pleasure. Let me know if I do anything wrong, there's a lot to learn! -- Dave.Dunford
Flickr.com is a good image-oriented community site. Highly recommended. Jez 17:25, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks - I'll take a look. Dave.Dunford 17:29, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Alphabetizing Aces[edit]

Do you have an automatic way of alphabetizing these lists? I spent some time on one section emulating a human bubble-sorter; if I'd had the right sort of program I could have done it in seconds. Variable-length strings are hard to read into a spreadsheet for sorting, though I suppose I could have gotten a BASIC program writtenn for this in only a little more time than it took to do by hand. Some day I'd like to get some more information on the Canadian aces, even a pair of dates for each one and maybe the credited number of victories would add a lot to the entry. Someone did a good job with the Australian aces, ranking them by victories. --Wtshymanski 15:50, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nope - I was doing it the same way as you ("human bubble sort"). I can envisage ways of mechanising this task, but you'd probably have to assume the last word (i.e. everything following the final space) constituted the surname - not always the case, but probably better than nothing. I'll look into it. -- Dave.Dunford 15:57, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

St. John Philby[edit]

The copy edits on Jack Philby look real good, thanks. I have a question though (being a newbie). Franklin Roosevelt appears twice, first time just as a name dropper, second time in context of his personal involvement with the Philby Plan. Is it always just appropriate to link the name in its first occurance in an article, or wait to some involvment with context? Thx. Nobs 19:14, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty new to this myself, so I don't know the "official" answer (if there is one). I'll try to find out. Personally I'd be tempted in circumstances like this to link both the first mention, and the "key" mention. Dave.Dunford 19:23, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

practi (c/s) ed[edit]

FYI in your edit on Eeny, meeny, miny, moe - "practiced" is the American spelling (I assume you're not a USAian; "practised" looks wrong to me). Generally wikipedia doesn't switch from one to the other unless there is good reason - e.g., American spelling in a story about an American person - because it leads to pointless edit wars. I didn't change it back, I'm just mentioning it. - DavidWBrooks 20:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'm British and in British English "practice" is the noun and "practise" the verb; I didn't realise this didn't hold in American English. I'll not object if it's reverted and I'll try to refrain from UK-centric spelling edits in future Dave.Dunford 20:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Rushden & Diamonds/Relegation from conference[edit]

In [1] you say that Rushden have also been relegated to the Conference twice. According to the Rushden & Diamonds article they have only been relegated once (this year). I'm not particularly knowledgable on this, so I thought I'd check with you before reverting the Halifax Town article. Tdrawler 11:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right - 2005/06 was the first time Rushden were relegated from the League. Change reverted. Dave.Dunford 13:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Malcolm Shotton[edit]

Nice work on the article. I'm especially pleased to have the other half of the colossal defence, Gary Briggs, linked to, since I started the latter article. Dudesleeper 19:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Class War[edit]

The article I read was five over years ago so I cannot give chapter and verse, but I can quite clearly remember Skinner being quoted as saying that he "hated posh people" and that football had gone down hill since they admitted the middle classes and women (for whom he used some perjorative term like "floosie"). Perhaps these asinine comments were an attempt at humour. Perhaps they were an exemplification of the putrid and poisonous English class system. Or perhaps Skinner was, er, misrepresenting himself. You tell me. Bill Tegner 23:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Dave ..your pics[edit]

Your pics are great .... do consider loading them to wikimedia commons ... the advantage is that other wikis can use them and many of the other derbyshire pics are there. 22:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Dave, I'm guessing that you are the man behind so many useful pictures on Geograph - I have loaded dozens recently and your name featured - sorry can't remember which precisely... but thanks. Do consider loading them en bloc to commons. I could help with the cataloguing task. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - yes, they're my pics on Geograph. I suppose I might get around to uploading some of them to Wikipedia Commons some time but I've got 1000s of images (the joy of digital!). Don't suppose you know if there's any way of moving a picture from Wikipedia to the Commons? Some of my earlier pics could do with being moved. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

John Reames[edit]

Your editing of John Reames page is to delete interesting content not add to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.86.23 (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I only deleted the picture because it was incorrectly linked. Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


Best Wishes[edit]

Best wishes Dave and a great new year Victuallers (talk) 16:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


Great Bustard[edit]

The page is set out a lot more logically since your recent edit - good work! Dom Kaos (talk) 22:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

New Mills[edit]

I have almost finished my input here, I do have a batch of images to upload to Commons which will follow in a few days. As you realise, my edits come with signature grammmatical and spelling mistakes and a lot of the material is based on old books which may have been superceded. I will be offline all of today to let you catch up :-). The Kinder Sett issue is interesting and has a precedent with Mersey Goyt and Tame Etherow where in the early nineteenth century a stretch of the river would have the name of what we would now call the lesser tributary and vice versa! Here I have been looking at sources that refer to the mills on the Kinder in New Mills. No matter! I haven't done the demography section, each of the hamlets needs to be considered, and there are some holes on other sections such as Governance. Referring to the Goyt Trough , I didn't find any Derbyshire geology articles- now theres a thought. --ClemRutter (talk) 09:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)-

Reviewer rights[edit]

Hello there, Dave.Dunford. Since you're an experienced user, I suggest you request for reviewer rights here. Cheers, MC10 (TCGBL) 02:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Dave[edit]

I sent a message to you on Geograph ... Victuallers (talk) 19:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Kinder Downfall as a source of drinking water[edit]

Hello Dave, though i was not the writer for the whole sentence, i did however add the part on the adverse weather conditions. Reason being, because we had a guide on our hike up to the top, and he was saying that there way as way back down Kinder just near the downfall, and that we would be able to fill up our water bottles here. Finding that the route had partially collapsed, we decided to head back, knowing that we had no water, and the only water sources available, were tainted with what he suspected to be Carbolic Acid, and to drink such taint would cause us stomach upsets and the like. The edit was in good faith, as i wished to notify anyone that still believed the downfall route was accessible. Obviously, not knowing Kinder Scout that well myself, i took the guides word with a grain of salt. The edit in question, may not have been up to Wikipedia's standards, as i'm not a big contributor, but i hoped, that someone might clean it up after i edited.

Hope this clears things up for you Dave, and i do not resent you removing the post in the slightest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaunyrawrs (talkcontribs) 01:30, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

An invite[edit]

Hi Dave, can I tempt you and your to Derby, I missee your reply on Geograph (messaging is confusing there)?, hope to see you at Derby Museum on the 9th. Victuallers (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Yep, we'll come along. See you there. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I'll be there too; will be good to catch up with you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Three Shire Head[edit]

I guess it makes sense to use the Ordnance Survey name for Three Shire Head, but it seems a little odd that of the four citations following the first sentence in the Significance section two of them call it "Three Shire's Head", as do many other references to it. Shouldn't this alternative name be mentioned in the article? It is arguably grammatically correct btw, if "Three Shire" is considered to be a singular compound noun owning a single head. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Discussion copied to (and continued at) Talk:Three Shire Head. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Adam Chapman[edit]

I see you have undone the comment about Adam Chapman returning to OUFC, but you were the person who appears to have originally posted the information in the first place. Presumably you had access to solid information or you would not have broken the code of conduct for Wikipedia in posting unverifiable information. Or are you just getting cold feet that you personally have revealed information that you should not have done, now that the link to the official site and the missing allocation of a number 7 has been identified? I see on Facebook that you are an OUFC supporter, presumably with inside knowledge and you don't want to be found out for posting inside knowledge, and you clearly read Rage Online. Either way I'm happy to respect your wish to not have this information revealed if you confirm this to be the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GodalmingY (talkcontribs) 09:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Discussion copied to (and continued at) Talk:Adam Chapman. Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:40, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for your edits at Buxton. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Western Mere[edit]

I don't understand why if the coordinates are correct the Wikipedia mobile app continues to show it in St Helen's Street Derby — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.193.100 (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Nor do I. They're right now. Maybe your mobile has cached an old version of the page with the incorrect co-ordinates. These are the co-ordinates in the article: 52°53′54″N 1°19′37″W / 52.898403°N 1.326808°W / 52.898403; -1.326808 Dave.Dunford (talk) 20:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

A6[edit]

I reversed the split and trimmed about 20K out of the original article. I figure more can be trimmed by removing some more of the specificity in road names. Another option would be to minimize landmarks along the route to places that have their own articles. I hope that this is a good start on minimizing the fat and maximizing the meat in the article. Imzadi 1979  22:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I saw. It wasn't really about the quantity, it was more the quality - the route description is littered with typos, full of needless italics and bare external links, largely unsourced and full of unnecessarily detailed (and probably dated) information about petrol stations and shops. I'll maybe look at it another time, but I still think the article was better without it. Dave.Dunford (talk) 23:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, the links are gone, as are all of the petrol stations. I pulled the italics as well. Shuffling the content though into another article isn't the solution; poor-quality content still existed. The solution though is to improve the quality. Why have one article bereft of content, and one full of poor content, when we can have a single article with good content? Imzadi 1979  23:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I guess so. I was going to withdraw the above response as I understand your reasons and intentions better now I've seen your messages at Talk:A6 road (England). I don't feel that strongly really, I was just doing what had been suggested by others on the talk page. I'm still sceptical that a junction-by-junction account of all the incidental twists and turns of a lengthy road is ever going to be terribly valuable or relevant to an encyclopaedia, however well written it is (that's what maps are for); but I can see that hiding it in a separate article isn't really a solution. Thanks for your work. Dave.Dunford (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Pistyll Rhaeadr[edit]

Hi,

In this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Waterfall&oldid=429102481 you repeated the popular claim that Pistyll Rhaeadr is the tallest waterfall in Wales. That information is not correct. The waterfall was claimed to be the tallest by the Victorians, who set it up as a tourist attraction, and wanted to attract more tourists (it worked). The waterfall is not the tallest waterfall in Wales by any measure, and its height is even surpassed by a waterfall in the next valley. For more information, see the Pistyll Rhaeadr article, or this list of the tallest Welsh waterfalls: http://www.cavinguk.co.uk/holidays/waterfalls/Tallest.html

I have corrected the waterfall article. TarquinWJ (talk) 09:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Mea culpa, though it seems a common misconception. One lives and learns. Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring at Abingdon[edit]

Hi Dave, I saw you just reverted yet again this pesky IPs pathetic edits on Abingdon-on-Thames. Just to let you know I have reported User talk:87.115.163.24 for his edit warring at the 3RR Noticeboard here. Not only for his actions at Abingdon but also at Edmonton, Slough and other pages relating to boundary changes. Might be worth adding a comment there if you have a moment. Thanks Tmol42 (talk) 19:51, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Edits by Sockpuppet relating to historic county[edit]

Hi Dave, Like me you will have been iritated by the continual disruptivre editing by an editor using a series of IP addresses which has just started to reoccur following a period when articles such as Edmonton, London, Slough, Abingdon-on-Thames, Great Coxwell and Little Coxwell had come of protected article status. I have just posted a report on the Sockpuppetry Investigation Page see here. If you feel able to contribute to the report it would be much appreciated. Thanks. Tmol42 (talk) 15:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Blue John Bowl[edit]

Just curious as to why you removed the picture of the Blue John Bowl I added to Derbyshire Blue John? The Castleton Visitor Centre bowl seemed a particularly nice one to me. I couldn't parse the edit statements "photo of artefact, as requested in feedback" or "correct photos", so I'm not sure what the issue is. Pasicles (talk) 14:26, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Responded at User talk:Pasicles. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:04, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Okay that's fine -- just an edit conflict, and I didn't spot that feedback link on the page, so thanks for the explanation. The only reason I preferred the Castleton bowl is that it shows the banding of the Blue John, as well as its translucent qualities. I'll put the picture back when I've expanded the article a bit. I have a copy of Trevor D. Ford's book on Derbyshire Blue John, which is very comprehensive on all aspects of the mineral. I'll have to have a go at trying to answer the other Feedback question - although from what I've read noone really knows for sure what causes the purple-blue colour in Blue John. Anyway, thanks again. Pasicles (talk) 15:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Packhorse bridges[edit]

Hi, after your edit to River Horner I noticed your work on packhorse bridges. Do you think Allerford, Bow Bridge, Plox and/or Robber's Bridge should be included? These are the only ones I know about which have wp articles yet in Somerset.— Rod talk 09:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Rod - I'll add them to my list. Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:47, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Rivers crossed by Packhorse bridges[edit]

Here is a list of four rivers crossed by Packhorse bridges, which do not yet have articles. I will attempt to create articles as draft articles, and then move them to mainspace.

Four articles will be more than enough for me to do in the near term. If there are more, someone else can do them. I have taken the River Horner article as a starting point. Any hints beyond what I will find in existing English river articles for sources, please let me know right here on your talk page. River Horner has a fair amount of detail. I know how to acquire images at Wikimedia Commons.

Question: generally speaking, are Packhorse bridges safe for cyclists to cross as riders, or must they generally walk across the bridges? Perhaps it depends on the bridge. If known, this would be useful information to include in articles. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi there—good luck with the river articles. I've worked on a few UK river articles in the past, but I don't think I know of any particularly useful sources, apart from Streetmap for maps at various scales. I'd concentrate on the River Kennett and River Yarty in particular; the others (Haigh Clough, Harden Beck, and more recently Grains Gill) are fairly minor streams and I feel you might find there's not a lot to say; such articles will probably never amount to more than stubs. I hadn't expected that every river/stream mentioned would necessarily have its own article, by the way—some of these bridges cross very minor streams, and it will be even more difficult outside the UK—but it's great that you're taking this on. Note that the River Kennett (two Ts) in Suffolk is a completely different river to that described in the River Kennet (one T) article to which River Kennett currently redirects.
As for cycling: it depends on the bridge (and the cyclist!). True packhorse bridges were originally designed for laden horses, so physically they're generally wide enough for cyclists (though they often have cobbled or other rough surfaces that might be difficult to ride on, they may be steeply humped and they tend to have low parapets). However in the UK we have rights-of-way legislation that makes a distinction between footpaths (walkers only) and bridleways (walkers, horse-riders and cyclists) so it would generally depend on the status of the right-of-way that crosses the bridge as to whether a cyclist is (officially) allowed to ride over it. (I believe cyclists can legally push their bikes along footpaths, so long as they remain dismounted, but I may have read that that's a legal grey area.) In many cases the status of the right-of-way will be indicated on the relevant Ordnance Survey map, but sometimes they're in the middle of nowhere with no official right of way over them, or they're on "white roads" on the map whose status is indeterminate. In other countries the rights of cyclists would depend on local regulations and customs. So I'm not sure a simple "yes or no" for cyclists would be practical; but it might be useful to add a column for the status of the right-of-way that crosses the bridge (if any). Some (see Clun Bridge) even have public roads over them, though this is unusual—their narrowness often precludes their use by vehicles. I'll try it out on the sandbox article. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the information on rivers/streams. I don't mind creating a stub article, but of course sometimes such articles attract the attention of deletionists. I am interested in increasing my new article creation total. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The situation with cyclists is far more complicated than I imagined, but some of what you say above could be included in the list, or individual articles. That's where pictures of the bridge surface and parapets are more useful than landscape articles. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again. I've added (where I can establish it) the status of the right-of-way in the Notes column in my sandbox article. Dave.Dunford (talk) 16:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
After reading Rights of way in England and Wales, I see the matter is even more subtle than I gathered from your remarks above, especially for cyclists. Also, I think that your addition of a status of the right-of-way may not be the same as in the article about the bridge itself. Being a Wikipedia editor is not always easy, especially for those of us devoted to accuracy, consistency, and understanding what an article is telling the average reader. Even when an American is reading an article about bridges in England, there may be subtle details that an American may not recognize. Oh, and what is going to happen with articles about bridges in Spain? --DThomsen8 (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation links[edit]

The sample list at User:Dave.Dunford/Packhorse has four place names with links to disambiguation pages rather than articles, which is shown by a yellow emphasis if your preferences are set to show this status. Specifically, these are Oare, Tamworth, Wellow and West Midlands. West Midlands should be West Midlands (county), and even that is somewhat confusing, since the town of Hampton-in-Arden was in Warwickshire until 1974. Probably you know some or all of this, but I have been very specific above so other readers can follow what I am describing. There is a bot that goes around telling editors when they have created links to disambiguation pages, so I am quite aware of the possibility, and I try hard to check out links that I add.

Somewhat off the topic, I see that your Fodder section has packhorse bridge photos identified by their photos at Wikimedia Commons. I have been looking at several of the photos there, and learn that many of them have coords, either because they were taken by a GPS equipped camera (I have one), or because an editor added that information later. That information is good to have when creating or updating packhorse bridge articles. --DThomsen8 (talk) 19:53, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. I should be able to disambiguate those placenames OK (I think I came across a tool for doing it just the other day—or I'll adjust my settings as suggested—and it should be obvious which is the correct one). UK counties are a nightmare, even for the natives (see WP:UKCOUNTIES for evidence!) but I'll tidy up before I go live with it. I should be able to find co-ordinates for most of the bridges using a combination of Geograph, Google Maps, the various heritage listing sites and the like. What I'm finding, though, is a number of bridges that are labelled "packhorse bridge" in the Commons, but which strictly aren't; there's a tendency to label any small old bridge as a packhorse bridge, even if it has carried a road since it was built. It's something of a spectrum from the obvious packhorse bridges (very narrow, with low parapets, on recognised packhorse routes) to the multi-arched medieval road bridge, so I don't think there's a formal cutoff point. I've ordered an out-of-print book on packhorse bridges and that might have something to say. Incidentally I think I'm going to call the resulting article List of packhorse bridges in the British Isles because I don't have the knowledge or the resources to cover other countries in the same detail and with the same confidence. Thanks again for showing an interest. I found another river with no article, by the way - the River Rasen. Dave.Dunford (talk) 20:39, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
You really should adjust your preferences to display disambiguation links. I agree that the corrections were obvious in the sample, but you may find more in unexpected places. As for the bridges which are medieval in age, but too wide to fit the packhorse bridge designation, just leave them out of the list, especially when it is clear from photos that the designation is not correct. The book may help with such decisions. --DThomsen8 (talk) 09:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Rather than the rather long title List of packhorse bridges in the British Isles, I suggest that you consider merging your sample list, which is now growing into a real draft list, with the existing Packhorse bridge list.
Here are the Document statistics, from the Page size tool, for your sample list:
   File size: 196 kB
   Prose size (including all HTML code): 1870 B
   References (including all HTML code): 162 B
   Wiki text: 33 kB
   Prose size (text only): 712 B (114 words) "readable prose size"
   References (text only): 6 B
While the "fodder" section somewhat increases the size, the numbers are a long way from too large for a list of bridges, even when the effects of doing a merger are considered. As for "having the knowledge or the resources to cover other countries in the same detail and with the same confidence..." you certainly know more than any other Wikipedia editor already, and who else will have that out of print book and the ability to add details from it here? Just imagine a few other continental country lists following the British Isles lists, and leave the details there for the future, and maybe someone from another country will do them. Yes, merger, not a new article, is what I suggest. --DThomsen8 (talk) 09:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Good idea, to merge my list into the existing article - I'll do that. As you say, if others have the knowledge to build similar lists for other countries, my UK lists can provide a template. The book I've ordered only covers the UK, by the way. Hoping to have the list done in a few days' time, though the book will probably give me a lot more "fodder". Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:22, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Draft Packhorse River articles[edit]

My first draft Packhorse River article is ready at User talk:Dthomsen8/Draft articles/River Kennett, but River Kennett is a redirect to River Kennet, so I believe that I must overlay the redirect with my new article, and hang hatnotes on all four rivers. There is one in Kent, one in Suffolk (my new one), one in Australia, and one in New Zealand, with similar but not identical names. My other choice would be to call the new article River Kennett (Suffolk).

I added a specific date from the Moulton, Suffolk village web site to your draft list, but that article has a statement which seems to me from Ordnance and Google maps to be incorrect. It says, The river flows northwards from Dalham to Kennett and then beyond to join the Lark river near Mildenhall. Not so, my draft shows that the river empties into Lee Brook, which empties into the Lark, which is a tributary of the River Great Ouse. The mouth is quite a way west of Mildenhall, and peculiarly enough, Kennett is in the easternmost part of Cambridgeshire. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I just completed Haweswater Beck to work with what was formerly a redirect to Haweswater Reservoir, but I am not sure how to mention a packhorse bridge in this article. Go ahead and add to my new article if you can, especially if you can make use of a photo you took.--DThomsen8 (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the elevation of the mouth of Potton Brook, but please explain to me how you found that information, and better yet, whether it can be added as a reference to the article, and some like articles. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:56, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I calculated it from the contours on the Ordnance Survey map at streetmap.co.uk, though reading contours is a bit of a trained art (the 25m contour is the nearest to the marked confluence). I tried putting a citation next to the elevation figure, but the Infobox river template doesn't appear to allow it (it gave me red errors when I previewed it), so I put the source in the edit summary. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:16, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Looking at the OS map you cite, it seems that perhaps the stream that enters the Isel at the mouth being cited is actually the Cam and Potton Brook is a tributary of the Cam. At least the letters "C a m" appear along the stream. I agree that reading contours is a skill that some do not have, but we former Army Lieutenants were taught weeks of map reading as part of our training. OS maps are much like the US Geological Survey maps and the military equivalents for Germany that I worked with, back in the Cold War. Still, I am certainly content to let you do it as needed. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Please take a look at User talk:Dthomsen8/Draft articles/Scandale Beck. I am having difficulties documenting the hydroelectric project and its opposition, but I just found a potential source of information in Cumbria. I also asked for help at Talk:Windermere#Largest natural lake in England? for an inline citation for that claim. I intend to go on to creating articles for other streams, and see what I learn from Wikipedia talk page requests and emails to fishing groups in the UK. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Deserted medieval villages[edit]

Hi. As a contributor to List of lost settlements in the United Kingdom, you might be interested to see a discussion that's just opened on "How to Write about... Deserted Medieval Villages" at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements. GrindtXX (talk) 02:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Possible pic for bridge in Queen Camel[edit]

I noticed you had edited another couple of Somerset articles and looked again at User:Dave.Dunford/Packhorse. I noticed you didn't have a pic for the bridge at Queen Camel. Would File:The Old Mill on the River Cam, West Camel - geograph.org.uk - 693898.jpg be the one?— Rod talk 17:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Wrong bridge, unfortunately. The one I'm after is this rather insignificant article: http://goo.gl/maps/iUaAM. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
OK sorry I don't have a pic of that one.— Rod talk 17:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

DAB on your list you have bridges at Rode and Tellisford both linked to River Frome they should be River Frome, Somerset.— Rod talk 19:35, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - sorted. Feel free to dive in and fix anything else you find, if you like. I'm nearly done. Dave.Dunford (talk) 21:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
If you are nearly done, my best wishes to you when you merge into the Packhorse bridge article. I am expecting you to limit yourself to merging in the England packhorse bridges, and adding the Scotland, Wales, and other UK lists later, but perhaps not. I will be nibbling away at minor English streams crossed by packhorse bridges for quite a while. I gave up on the River Yarty, hard. Others are easier, but still a challenge. The photos available on Wikimedia Commons do make the result quite pretty. --DThomsen8 (talk) 17:17, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Dthomsen8. I thought I'd do what I can for Scotland and Wales before I finish (they aren't covered in the book I bought but there are other sources), and I want to check the English bridges before I do the merge - there was a lot of cutting and pasting and I may well have duplicated some links and references that shouldn't have been duplicated. I'll look forward to seeing the river articles appear. I'll get back to you about the Potton Brook query later. You may be right, but I couldn't see "Cam" on the map. I need to go back to it. Dave.Dunford (talk) 18:41, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Tom Cain (author)[edit]

Hi Dave, I reverted your addition of the {{Dead link}} on this page as I can access the "high50.com" article just fine... Could you take another look and see if you're still having problems? Cheers, Nikthestunned 17:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Weird — I got a 404 error, and still do: http://www.high50.com/archives/life-times/we-need-men-not-boys. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Hand-coding[edit]

Hey all :).

I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).

You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyes@wikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).

If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-officeconnect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Scandale Beck[edit]

Tonight I went ahead and created Scandale Beck, after waiting several weeks for various inline citations to bolster its status. Perhaps you can find an appropriate citation to establish the statement "...Windermere, the largest natural lake in England." I would like better citations for the opposition to the high head hydroelectric proposal. Maybe you might know something that I don't in trying to find better citations. On the other hand, there were plenty of images to choose from, and I am pleased with the visual impact of the article. I must say that the packhorse bridge list looks mighty fine now, due to your hard work. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Citation added for Windermere, as requested. Good work. Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment[edit]

Hey Dave.Dunford; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:27, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Good consolidation, but on hamlets issue, have left briefest highlights only. Feel free to discuss if this offends.[edit]

Hi Dave, many visitors to parishes and more important, historians, in the country will be perplexed, as with the history of Chinley, mentioning rather incongruously there, Bank Hall, in its article, how tenuous links are made to places outside of the remit of an article. Important historical sites in civil parishes themselves however are worthy of getting a small mention, even if this causes a tiny amount of duplication, the overriding concern being to encourage further knowledge, and enrich the main "mother" article as it were with an allusion to the smaller ones. I've therefore taken your points on board by interlinking the other articles with

Main article: ...xxx

In writing about the south-east and Northumbria substantially, user consensus has identified that where administrative borders take in key landmarks, a summary-only duplication is no bad thing, particularly for landmarks that span loose hamlet boundaries and based on for example listed building user agreed criteria don't deserve their own articles, but which are notable as bastions of the history of both an ecclesiastical parish, the basic historic place unit, and their inclusion is indeed strengthened when part of a civil parish.

In short I am wary of compartmentalisation, and love to consolidate worthless place articles by putting them under their proper post town or civil parish, there can be no doubt that some hamlets are very much like many urban wards, they completely offend the guidance of WP:UKCITIES which aims to avoid non-notable hamlet having their own articles. While others are borderline so can be better incorporated into main articles best in full, pictorial-assisted sections usually under the subheading "Localities", I am respecting the high natural beauty and isolation of the Peak District places by leaving them well alone, and suggesting if you live in/near one merge it as you see fit. I will highlight those places to historians (and I very much hope as a proud Brit, tourists) will be interested or indeed need to hear about in the main parish article. I hope this assists you in my reasoning, as duplication is something of which I strongly disapprove, but false, sometimes estate-agent-led over-modern compartmentalisation often leads to vast ignorance. Adam37 (talk) 17:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to perfect Chapel-en-le-Frith now, sorry if I lost some of your rather good factual and grammatical changes, which I will admit I didn't spend the time in analysing.
Thanks for your suggestions, which would replicate my sensible consolidations in places like the London Borough of Hounslow and Shackleford which were becoming subdivided to the nth degree, losing all connection with not just their local government, but more importantly, their history and therefore their identity. Being impartial, pro-knowledge and taking an interest in policy and guidance as you do are unfortunately skills which most people who initially write about their local area only it would seem lack. To illustrate this, clearly you don't have the solecism of shooting yourself in the foot, which I guess whoever penned that rather economically and historically illiterate article on Dove Holes did. They awfully focussing on its one time R5 Live comedy "Worst village" prize. I'm guessing they were jilted or something similar in Dove Holes based on its terrible tone. There should in fact possibly be some policy guidance in UK Geography or in WP:UKCITIES on what would constitute an non-encyclopedic or non-notable award, as it hasn't escaped my notice that e.g. Albury, Surrey is a stinking pit compared to high-up and National Park-centred Dove Holes (see photograph of the Albury tip) and yet has a far more glowing gloss applied, focussed on its biggest house particularly. And I'm sure I've seen plenty of other dubious awards, particularly focussed on C4's Best and Worst Places to Live in Britain, which skilful editors such as you, have thankfully with consensus (or silence) erased.Adam37 (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
My response at User talk:Adam37#Chapel-en-le-Frith. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:31, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

range of birth and death years[edit]

Just FYI, I mentioned this edit you made to Black Jack in a discussion I started at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Year ranges. Seems there may be some discrepancy in guidance. WP:MOSDAB#People refers to MOS:DOB while you were referring to MOS:YEAR which have somewhat different indications. olderwiser 10:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Andrew Bingham[edit]

Yeah, thanks for correcting my hideous writing and classy typos! Didn't have time to review the edit properly...

I've left a note on the talk of editor who added most of the content btw - doesn't seem to log in very often and edits primarily that article but it only seems a courteous thing to do. I'm thinking two paragraphs on campaigns seems about right in this case - maybe three. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Packhorse River articles[edit]

You will recall the Packhorse River articles I did last year. Some of them turned out well, and some were too tough for me, and I gave up on them. Now I might do another such article, but I look to you for suggestions. --DThomsen8 (talk) 17:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Mallerstang[edit]

Discussion moved to Talk:Mallerstang#Squirrel_picture. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Pennines[edit]

Great stuff, I've seen a lot of the actual Pennines recently. It's a big topic, not well covered. I might go see what the reference library has. Thanks for tidying my edits. J3Mrs (talk) 10:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Peak District[edit]

Heads up; TheSimsChicago45 confirmed as Sockpuppet Jameslovesavril at SPI now Blocked indef. Richard Harvey (talk) 20:25, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Notes columns and listed buildings[edit]

Hi Dave, as per your request the Derbyshire Grade I list now has a notes column where descriptions and contextual information can be added. Nev1 (talk) 12:03, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Nev. Will be interested to see how it looks with some of the other columns moved into that column; without that, I think there are too many columns. My reasons for wanting a Notes column were twofold:
  • As a space for extra, contextual information (which some Listed building lists already have, and which was otherwise rendered homeless)
  • As a home for some of the less important data (Date listed, List entry number) that currently have their own columns and which are not appropriate for sorting.

Dave.Dunford (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

The list entry number is used when the file is uploaded to Commons, so moving it into the notes section might work aesthecially but I think it might not work with processing images. Perhaps, and this would be an issue for KTC to answer on Commons where you mentioned the issue, it could be optional to have the column hidden but still feeding into the WLM tool? Just a thought, there are already a lot of optional fields and that may be over-complicating things. I think making sure we don't lose that contextual information is important, which is why I have tried to tread much more carefully when the original lists contain references and descriptions. Nev1 (talk) 12:48, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Jonathan Meades[edit]

The article says he'll be out for 12 weeks. with kind regards Jodie25 (Jodie25) 19:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, but I still think the information about Meades' injury is both trivial and speculative, and falls foul of Wikipedia policies on both counts. While it's the job of journalists to speculate or report predicted outcomes, it's not the job of an encyclopaedia. Per WP:NOTDIARY, "news reporting about celebrities and sports figures can be very frequent and cover a lot of trivia, but using all these sources would lead to over-detailed articles that look like a diary. Not every match played, goal scored or hand shaken is significant enough to be included in the biography of a person." Also, per WP:CRYSTAL, which I quoted when I first reverted your edit: "Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place." Much better to wait until Meades plays again, and then report how long he was out injured; it may be 10 weeks or it could be 14, and it's not as if it's the most significant thing that's ever happened in his career. Dave.Dunford (talk) 20:45, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Packhorse River articles[edit]

Sorry because I did not know about the tributary of the River Winster. For the sake of completing the column, could we have just that, "Tributary of the River Winster"? Apparently I am all right with adding the River Allen and the River Frome with clarifying counties in the Wikilinks. Perhaps I can create the Knowl Water article. I have written to the council about the Utterby bridge, but that may be on an unnamed stream. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

No problem, it's not obvious from the available sources. I'd be fine with that if it doesn't mess the formatting up too much – I'll try it out. Good luck with the other articles; sorry I haven't been in touch or done anything with the packhorse bridge/river articles, but I've been working heavily on various local Listed Building articles, e.g. Grade I listed buildings in Derbyshire, Grade II* listed buildings in Derbyshire Dales. There may be scope for new articles there, though working out which buildings are most worthy of an article (and why) may not be obvious to a non-local and non-specialist. I did find time yesterday to photograph a packhorse bridge that didn't previously have a public domain photo, though :)
Regarding Utterby, there's no name for the stream on the relevant Ordnance Survey map and it's a very short stream, so probably not conducive to an article. Knowl Water is slightly longer, but still fairly minor. If you're still keen on river articles, River Meese could do with expanding, but it's already a stub. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:12, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Anne Hegerty[edit]

While non independent sources may be used in parts of an article, the article as a whole must be built on content from third party sources. In Anne Hegerty, three quarters of the article is built from non-third party sources and so an improvement of sources is required. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

defaultsort[edit]

Just a reminder that the correct markup for DEFAULTSORT uses a colon, not a pipe. For example, {{DEFAULTSORT:Barnet}}, not {{DEFAULTSORT|Barnet}}. — Paul A (talk) 01:12, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Noted - I get it right most of the time but seem to have the occasional mental block. Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Farlands Booth - welcome correction and thanks[edit]

Dear Dave

Thank you for your local input, for which I am very grateful. I am in the process of creating my own personal gazeteer of the British Isles and my first start point has been the various List of Places pages on Wikipedia. In the case of the Derbyshire list there are a very large number of entries that display as Red, which means that they do not have any article linked to them. These places lists are meant to be of cities, towns, villages and hamlets. I have come across some cases where what has proved to be just a single farm has been included in the list, so I have chosen to not include them in my own list. Farlands was one of those cases which was red. In order to validly change a red name, to a linked blue name, I have used the Internet to find support for addition of a sentence or two about that name in the appropriate article. By appropriate article I mean to say that I normally use the article for the parish in which the small place lies or the existing one for the nearest other hamlet or village. I have found that the visionofbritain.org.uk and streetmap.co.uk are most particularly useful for supporting what I am doing to improve Wikipedia's links.

Now to the specifics of my research re Farlands -

When I looked at the OS map for Hayfield, I thought that, going by the size of the lettering, Farlands Booth was being designated as a small hamlet, see

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=403500&y=387500&z=120&sv=Hayfield&st=3&tl=Map+of+Hayfield,+Derbyshire+[City/Town/Village]&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf

I thank you for your correction, it would now just seem that the presence of Farlands, in the List of Places in Derbyshire, was one of those cases, which are not uncommon, where a single farm has been included in a list that is meant to only include places of a hamlet size or larger. I did think the reference to Kinder Scout could have been edited and left in though, as the article on Kinder Scout itself refers to Hayfield as being one of the 'entry points' for that National Nature Reserve, along with Edale. I have corrected the List of Places in Derbyshire entry to now just refer to Farlands as it did before; it is questionable, though, as to whether it actually deserves an entry in a list that is only meant to go down to hamlet size.

Your editing of my entry also gives me heart as it proves that at least somebody out there is double checking my work. Peer review is always good to experience for a researcher and bookworm type like myself.

Warmest regards

Philip Hunt

Wikiphunt (talk) 02:32, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Treak Cliff Cavern[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Yellow Army[edit]

I know, it's not a nickname for Oxford Utd, but it was a citation, The Yellow army was set up as a redirect to Norwich City, where it was a nickname without a citation. Bevo74 (talk) 20:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Buxton Opera House[edit]

Hi Dave, Saw that you had reverted the content I added yesterday to BOH and marked as 'notability unclear'. Not sure what that error definition means and how to update content to ensure clarity. Thanks Markxkr (Dave.Dunford) 06:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Markxkr. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dave, Not sure if this is the right place to respond, so apologies if I have this wrong, thank you for your comments and 'guiding' me correctly on Wiki rules. Updated in all innocence, but understand the correct usage now. Thanks again. Markxkr (Dave.Dunford) 21:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Derbyshire moors[edit]

Hi,

I've just created a stub, at Derbyshire moors. Please can you add to it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)