User talk:JRPG

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

Welcome!

Hello, JRPG, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  __meco 13:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


{{helpme}}

A minor collision seems to have occurred in the English Channel!! A photo from the History section has run into the next section and I'm not yet fully up top speed with how to sort it.

It's not perfect, but I've applied two quick fixes. First, the {{-}} template will keep text or images in one section from overflowing into another section (it sort of "pushes down" the other section until). Second, having two images very close together on the left margin, with differing sizes, appears to have had some confusing results. Hope that resolves things well enough, for now. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


{{helpme}} Structural problems in Groby Old Hall I don't know what is wrong but I suspect there is a fault in the Leicestershire stub template. The orphaned image doesn't appear anywhere in the text and is nothing whatever to do with me!! Thanks in advance JRPG 23:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed it. The image here on English Wikipedia was deleted as the same image appeared on Wikipedia Commons. However, that image was deleted on Commons itself as duplicate as another image on Commons. I've fixed the template to use the image at this "new" location. KTC 23:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Contents

Hallaton Treasure[edit]

Hi, the BBC date for the Hallaton Treasure info is incorrect. Am contacting them to try and get it changed to 211AD, instead of 221AD. Thanks :-) http://www.leics.gov.uk/treasure_oldestcoin.htm AdeleBeeby (talk) 11:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC) (Sorry if this comment's in the wrong place! Newb)

No problems at all with this page as it isn't very busy but normal procedure is to use the New Section tab at the top on the right -which I think puts it at the bottom. Usually everything to do with the topic should be on the talk page -and I've transferred a summary of our discussion there. It should stop someone else changing it back. Talkpages automatically appear on my watch list so I don't think I would have missed it.
Could I suggest you add a few words about yourself on your home page? Most serious editors do and it makes it easier to identify yourself as one.
Apologies for mis-spelling your username in the summary, I think I've got flu! JRPG (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Dogger Bank incident[edit]

Commented on the talk page of the article. Ingolfson 09:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Redirects after merge[edit]

After a merge, the remaining redirect and its edit history have to be kept for GFDL reasons. Besides, they are often useful. Happy editing! --Tikiwont 12:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

North Sea history[edit]

Since you commented on the history section of the North Sea article, I'd appreciate your input on my summary of the section, User:Jieagles/North Sea History. Whatever comments, edits, etc. Thanks Jieagles 22:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jieagles, I'll happily do that in the next day or so. JRPG 21:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

North Sea[edit]

Hey. It's been a while but I finally went back over the North Sea article and am hoping to renominate it for GA shortly. As an active contributor to the serious improvements made a year or so ago, I'd like to invite you to take a fresh look at it, do any clean up or copy editing I've missed and generally think about how to make it better. Thanks -- Jieagles (talk) 08:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

North Sea[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to the North Sea article. I have re-written some sections so that they can have sources, references and citations for every fact. Can you be a second set of eyes, and see if every number, year, new piece of info has a citation please. If you see a copy edit that needs being done, could you also help the article in the midst of the GA review. The GA review is currently studying the verifiablity of the article and if it is properly referenced with verifiable sources for facts. Kind Regards and thank you.SriMesh | talk 00:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

SpecialBarnstar.png The Special Barnstar
In appreciation of the hard work you have put into improving The Equitable Life Assurance Society --NSH001 (talk) 20:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Re Ros Altmann[edit]

I read the Talk page and see that you have placed article text there as a reference- I understand that you think it may go away from access on the internet, but leaving it on Talk is not a good idea. Maybe you could find it on the Way back machine? If you have the old link to it, you should be able to find it, and it would be better to link to it there. Good Luck Riverpa (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all your effort on this. Jack Straw's Ministry of Justice took over the Department of Constitutional affairs -and ..surprise, surprise they seemed not to think the document worth keeping. Unfortunately its too late for "Way Back" though it is available on subscription websites for anyone looking for the title. Would you suggest I removed it from the Talk page as it's probably served its purpose? JRPG (talk) 16:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


Mike Penning[edit]

Thanks for your comments, glad not to have started an argument. The dog bowl seems petty, I know, but I think it reflects well on Penning (and I'm no Tory). It's also an illustration of how otherwise decent MPs may have been dragged into the "expenses scandal" net. Yeah, we should keep an eye on political bios for improper amends - for or against. Penning's bio seems rather thin, omitting references to the local hospital, to his opposition to the re-opening of Buncefield and also his political location within the Conservative Party, for example. Ayfer Orhan's is even thinner. I added him and other, former, MPs to the "Politics in Dacorum" category. Folks at 137 (talk) 07:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Given your interests are rather similar to mine, shipwrecks and politicians (no connection implied), you might want to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom and Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships. Re Ayfer Orhan, there is consideration on the forum to deleting entries for people who have no notability other than being candidates. For the record, I am expanding the profile of capable MPs I've met irrespective of party, the country needs them.
    Regards JRPG (talk) 13:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I've started Parliamentary candidates in Hertfordshire and I'd appreciate your comments on whether it's a worthwhile task, bearing in mind the "notability" issue. An alternative would be to alter the page to provide thumbnails of candidates (or have both formats), similar to Primary schools in Dacorum, which might address the notability issue of each candidate. Folks at 137 (talk) 07:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Based on my own experience- and other comments I really would hesitate to do this and I've already refused a request from a candidate in my own constituency. In the absence of decent sources people use their own blogs or other dubious/libellous material and it degenerates, ruining the article's educational value. I had to remove an external link to the Guardian, Rate your MP as a single individual had filled pages of it.
See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Articles on Prospective Parliamentary Candidates for Election 2010
According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Constituencies individual constituencies are low importance. To me this is incomprehensible as 60 marginals decide the election.


Regards JRPG (talk) 14:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Footnote:Theres a fascinating gadget at http://stats.grok.se/en/201004/mike%20penning JRPG (talk) 21:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Equitable Life v Hyman[edit]

Hello JRPG, I would like to expand it, especially if it'd help you, but I might not do it straight away; just lots of stuff on. But if you want to ask specific questions I'm more than happy to look things up and help like that. It's an important case for contract law too. I think it wasn't unexpected - I would have blamed the directors in charge immediately before the collapse - who thought they could fist the GAR policy holders - they were a group of men whose integrity was a far cry from the people in charge since 18th century, who had had discretion, but never used it irrationally or to defeat people's legitimate expectations. It was such a shame to see the society brought to its knees as well - they could have done so much differently even after the judgment, but chose to let it go down. It was the height of hypocrisy when the former CEOs and Chairmen joined in blaming the government for failure to regulate its callousness! It'd be like watching the City blaming the government for the current financial crisis (well some probably are)? Well, that's just my impression, and I actually know very little but the bits I've seen in case law - do you think that's the wrong idea? Did you have personal experience with it? Best, Wikidea 12:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I have a small policy -but one taken out when the GAR case was imminent. I campaigned on company pensions at the same time as people were campaigning on Equitable. I know some of the people who wrote the original article, they were called as witnesses by the European Parliament and make regular tv appearances. They were experts ..but the article was a personal saga and therefore a disaster. I rewrote it as a favour ..and it took forever. The actuarian contributor NSH001 was interesting but blamed the HOL. I share your view that the GAR people had a point ..but were greedy. The European Parliament information was stunning. EU countries gave up local regulation to the UK which held the head office but -just didn't bother. Their report unfortunately had to be without prejudice. I hadn't dared remove the expert tags but the original writers all had professional financial qualifications and it was also checked by a leading Independent Trustee. The company is of real interest as a historic use of a maths/stats financial model as well as its modern legal and political importance, hence this article could go somewhere.

On another note, my degree is physics, interest is history and law and politics ..and I cribbed your radio4 box!
Regards JRPG (talk) 21:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC)


Tobin[edit]

Hi, I saw your comment about a police visit regarding content in the article and libel, have you got a link to a discussion or report about that, I would like to read about that. Off2riorob (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Fourth paragraph, response by Alison W

I have to say the whole thing proved nonsense in that Similar fact evidence was given i.e. the prosecution brought up the previous cases themselves. Being right however is of little consolation if facing a punishment for contempt of court and I wouldn't have touched it with a bargepole at that point. Re libel, Barry George has successfully sued but this was for allegations made after his conviction was overturned. They could have said what they liked had he remained convicted as his reputation was worthless.
Regards JRPG (talk) 21:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Very interesting, there is an issue with untrained writers and misrepresentation, I wonder how wikipedia is not sued more. Many thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 22:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Cyclopia. Your "impossibly long achived discussion .." included Wikipedia referenced in Tobin case. Have you noticed several IPs are single issue contributions i.e. this vote. I strongly hope they have nothing to do with the case. There's another dubious edit referring to John Haig which shows how easy it is to make mistakes. BTW I'm not sure whether breeching UK law is punishable, on conviction, elsewhere in the EU. JRPG (talk) 19:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've seen several articles talking about WP involvement but none talking about lawsuits or warnings against UK editors. The comment by AlisonW was quite enough however. The still unresolved point is, however: does an UK (or EU) editor face a reasonable risk of being sued? And in any case, what to do? Looks like something Mike Godwin should answer on behalf of the Foundation -and in fact he did on a very related case (also from [1]) : "Update: Mike Godwin replied to my email. His response is below. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 17:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC) "The Foundation's official position is that we are subject to American law, including the state and Constitutional law doctrines governing defamation in the United States. The Foundation would oppose any BLP policy that recognized and attempted to adapt to the defamation laws of any other jurisdiction. We are of course aware that some individuals may attempt to sue is in a foreign jurisdiction and attempt to enforce such a judgment in the United States. We have prepared for that possibility.
"Under no circumstances should the BLP policy be altered as a reaction to perceptions of the risk of defamation liability in non-U.S. jurisdictions."
Here it is not defamation, but the clear concept seems that WP answers only USA/Florida law, not else.
Also: BBC seems to happily publish and keep on line information about the case, see here, and I am sure they're much more aware than us of this kind of problems. If they do that, I can't see why we couldn't. --Cyclopiatalk 20:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Firstly I was on the receiving end in 2000, of what I believe was fraud involving a multi millionaire venture capitalist, a major donor to the Labour party with a lot of political influence. When I pursued the issue, I got a warning from their lawyers -which I knew I could safely ignore. The story was printed in 2 major UK sunday newspapers and the lawyers checked every line and allowed the guy a right of reply. A third newspaper scrapped an article after the threat of an injunction. Note the comparison with Wikipedia. A balanced article from a decent source, properly cited, will already have been checked by the source and is not a WP:BLP issue. We however are getting uncited assumption of guilt comments such as someone saying he's not the first mass murderer from his school.
Its only on a talk page but its both libellous and prejudicial, the latter being potentially a criminal matter.

Will Griffiths have a subsequent trial or retrial? If so the article may have to be taken down c.f. Tobin. Will some fool write something stupid whilst the trial is in progress? My suspicion is that trial rules are changing with the times. The judge will accept everyone has heard about the case, will tell the jury to ignore it and will have read the discussion. However he has the power to punish anyone under his jurisdiction if he wishes and that will be very bad publicity. The article is OK at present and should be protected during the trial. Regards JRPG (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I don't care at all about bad publicity, I care about editors being sued. How probable is this (a)in UK (b)in EU (c)elsewhere? In any case, I support protection of the article during the trial. --Cyclopiatalk 12:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
UK editors are potentially at risk of libel if and only if they don't cite a good source. In practice, libel is unlikely and non criminals can complain about their entry.
If a UK newspaper editor is deemed to have behaved in a way prejudicial to the trial, he is at serious risk of being hauled before the judge and given a short prison sentence for Contempt of court. In practice, a warning is given first. An UK or EU Wikipedia editor connected to a witness/accused and using their knowledge could expect a prison sentence ..and worryingly we have a few IPs making their first edit.
It's untested in the courts but I believe a UK administrator who ignored a court request is at risk as they will be presumed to understand the rules. It would be politically impossible for EU citizens to be singled out ahead of UK citizens. A US citizen is not under any UK jurisdiction.
I'd like to see the page frozen and advice from a UK solicitor. The alternative is to wait to see if any guidance is issued by the judge.

JRPG (talk) 20:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Colleville-sur-Mer, Sword beach, Philippe Kieffer[edit]

Philippe Kieffer was the commanding officer of 1er Bataillon de Fusiliers Marins Commandos which were No. 1 and No. 8 Troops of No. 10 (Inter-Allied) Commando. Both theses troops under Kieffer's command were assigned to No. 4 Commando of the 1st Special Service Brigade for the Normandy Landings. They landed on Sword beach 6 June 1944 D-Day and were tasked with the capture of the Casino at Ouistreham (as depicted in the movie The Longest Day (film) if you have seen that.

Omaha beach is definitely wrong. Hope this helps. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for this Jim. I've come to the highly irritating conclusion that my Daily Torygraph source [1] is completely wrong and it should have been Colleville-Montgomery not Colleville-sur-mer so I've reverted my edits. It's a damn good job the commandos didn't make that sort of mistake.
Regards. JRPG (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Rollback[edit]

Wikipedia Rollback.svg

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

While I'm here, could I ask you to make sure you warn the vandals you revert. twinkle can help you there if you have a compatible browser. :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


Re: Unacceptable username[edit]

You're very welcome. As often as I drop the ball, it's nice to be told when I've done something properly! Keep up the good work yourself. - Vianello (Talk) 22:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Nigel Farage[edit]

I've given the IP a 12h "shot across the bows" block for that little gem. Should further blocks be necessary, they will get longer. Mjroots (talk) 18:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Next[edit]

You're doing a good cleanup job there. I haven't had much time today but I have noticed that George Davies (retailer) contains a lot of similar puffery, you may want to take a look at that ... next ... pablo 16:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Pablo, and thanks for the (highly necessary)encouragement. Next is a local firm, many employees bought shares around the 1988 level, -which may explain their enthusiasm for putting sales dates and wondrous descriptions, all uncited, in the article. I've tried to keep it useful to marketing students but it still needs work and there are a few sections which don't fit together. Regards JRPG (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Caterpillar Club[edit]

You are in Edit history as an editor on this article. It has been multiply tagged for improvement as an alternative to being recommended for deletion. This is a request for editorial intervention to improve this article. Please help if possible.

Georgejdorner (talk) 17:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Georgejdorner. I followed my usual approach of adding detail from military obituaries only to find this heap. It's potentially a very interesting article which has been hijacked. I'll put more constructive comments on its talk page. Regards JRPG (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Use of feminine gender for ships[edit]

It is just a small point but I don't think an English encyclopaedia should be using the feminine gender when referring to inanimate objects. It is largely a matter of personal preference so I think we need a ruling through a wider discussion to ensure consistency throughout Wikipedia. To get some support I searched for precedents. I found a discussion from 2004 in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive (ships as "she") which seemed to reach no conclusion, and there is also a statement in Gender-specific pronoun, though this may just be one person's opinion. This latter entry refers to The Chicago Manual of Style. This is a paid web-site so I took this lead no further. I then looked at other style guides. The BBC and The Economist are silent on the subject. However The The Guardian's style guide under the heading 'ships' is against the feminine gender (see [[2]]). However in fairness I should point out that The Times style (see [[3]]) is in favour of the feminine gender. Whether newspapers and encyclopaedias should have similar styles is debatable, but I think a standard should be defined in Wikipedia's Style Guide as well. Are you happy if a discussion point is posted there to get a clearer ruling? JMcC (talk) 12:47, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely. As you say its hardly the most important point but consistency is important.
I'm not aware of any warship which isn't referred to as 'she' in Wikipedia. German battleship Bismarck, HMS Hood (51), HMS_Montagu_(1901), HMS Invincible (1907).
Similarly MS Estonia.
Regards JRPG (talk) 20:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
The MoS talk page pointed out that the standard is defined in Wikiproject:Ships. You can use either it or she but you should not change gender in an article once a gender has been defined by the originator. ie you were right to revert my edit. JMcC (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Hi. Just to say thanks for your kind comments at Wikipedia:Editor review/Cordless Larry‎. Hopefully together we've managed to improve the The Freedom Association article somewhat from rather inauspicious beginnings. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Larry. I'm not noted for flattery but we ended up with a much better referenced and more informative article and you did the difficult work ..so thanks to you.
Alan Meale is on my list of (relatively) local MPs and has Cypriot connections which may be of interest to you. If not, we'll still meet on the odd project. JRPG (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Af447 deletion of recent contribution appropriate[edit]

A later report from the BEA, released on 29 July 2011, indicated that the pilots had not been trained to fly the aircraft "in manual mode or to promptly recognize and respond to a speed-sensor malfunction at high altitude" nor was this a standard training requirement at the time of the accident.

Text before this indicates quotation from Flight safety foundation official giving the impression that the crew was specifically not instructed in flying at this altitude. The passage originally had just mention of FSF and has an article on this entity though a 'trust' type non profit, still being in endeavour to train pilots, the mention of lack of training may be in conflict with organization's self interest. The extension of what they do was added by me as a part copy verbatim from Wikipedia page on FSF Flight Safety Foundation so a conflict can at least be recognized. I believe those pilots did not need specific training; specific training can be helpful; all pilots should be able to handle such situation given time which was short and weather inclement.

I know, you also felt, on deletion of my input, that there is still something lacking and have tried to rectify as per your last input on that page around the above paragraph. All this, ironically, stems from address by the BEA in third report about lack of training, which I believe is judgmental in the least. You must have seen my input on discussion page.

I feel the section needs more work to neutralize implications of lack of training which ultimately will not hold water. Thanks.

Patelurology2 (talk) 02:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC) Patelurology2 (talk) 02:29, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

  • also: " meaning they don't know how an aircraft is manually handled at that altitude. " is judgmental.

Patelurology2 (talk) 02:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

  • User:Johnson487682 had participated in above and will post a copy to the respected Wikipedian.

Patelurology2 (talk) 13:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Patelurology2. Thanks for a very courteous and rational explanation of your problems with my post and please don't feel insulted that I amended what you wrote. We're both trying to make a better article -and one which won't further upset relatives. The key area of disagreement as I see it is whether Flight Safety Foundation is wp:NPOV. Could I suggest you repost on Talk:Air France Flight 447 as this keeps all article related discussions together and everyone can see it? I will do what I can to ensure we get agreement and of course will accept the majority verdict.
Regards JRPG (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)



James Morris MP[edit]

Regarding the text you removed, a source for the fact that James Morris set up a Jobs Club as part of his campaign can be found at http://www.halesowennews.co.uk/news/local/4692065.Halesowen_and_Rowley_Regis_Job_Club_is_up_and_running/

Mj wood (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for this MJ. I'll use your reference and add it -please feel free to suggest other references. In the mean time, the article would be improved by a good photo. If you have one and are willing to make it copyright free, I could help you upload it.
Regards JRPG (talk) 10:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I have uploaded a photo but I'm not sure that I got the filter tags correct as I still seem to have some code above the photo. Could you have a look?
Regards Mj wood (talk) 14:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Done it. I cribbed the syntax off another photo. If you can get any other MPs that would be good too. JRPG (talk) 17:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


Many thanks for removing my silly mistake[edit]

Many thanks for removing the error which I foolishly made in the article on Sue Townsend. When I said that "Turnbull is an outspoken republican", I did, of course, mean "Townsend". What ever made me call her Turnbull I have no idea! Apologies about that - it was merely a slip, and you removal of it is well appreciated. With best wishes, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 14:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

No probs, I've done a few of those. I saw one of her plays -showing HMQ and family moving to a rundown part of Leicester. It was surprisingly sympathetic and showed them coping well. JRPG (talk) 15:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, JRPG. Please check your email – you've got mail!
Message added 02:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

WilliamH (talk) 02:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Otters[edit]

Great to have you joining our bevy of Otters; a very rare but important wiki fauna. For Haldane I could only find this pic on flicker. It has a no-derivative licencse so its not allowed on Commons. You could upload it here under fair use. Thats if you dont mind the risk of it being attacked by the hordes of deletionists who seem to be patrolling new uploads, looking for things to destroy. I recently uploaded a pic with the same license for the 2012 Olympic hunger summit, but it only took a day for them to put it up for deletion.

Haldane's brilliant and seems to have the best social conscience of the whole court. He's not likely to come into his own though untill the Eds are installed in their rightful places at 10 & 11. While there's still loads one could say about him, I'm not sure its adviseable to build up the article too much at this point. FeydHuxtable (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Feyd. My main objective in WP:BLPs is to provide a completely fair description of people including their right of reply and subsequent events as these often change the tone of the article. I edit policians of all parties and believe a good photo improves an article -and that the subject appreciates it. Probably a long shot but I'll see what I can do. If I can find more Telegraph, BBC, Guardian, Independent articles I won't hesitate to expand the article -and would appreciate your help. I really don't expect any edit from these sources to be reverted and I don't get involved in disputes. Regards JRPG (talk) 17:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


Portillo[edit]

Hi there JRPG! I have re-edited the Portillo article to remove the opinions of a supposed 'former lover' of Portillo.The citing of these opinions, and the naming of this person as a "former lover" of Portillo (whethe ror not in quotes), is clearly against WP:BLP, even if a third party has repeated the opinions and the alleged status of the person. WP:BLPSOURCES, WP:BLPREMOVE,and WP:BLPGOSSIP, amongst others, all refer to this. The only 'evidence' that this person was a lover of Portillo is the allegation of the person himself, and your source does not give any additional evidence. WP:BLP states clearly 'Biographies of living persons ("BLP"s) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives'. Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 18:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Smerus. Whilst I don't think there was anything wrong with my post, I'm sure it can be improved. I'll get back to you in the next day or two & put a summary of your comments on the talk page. We're both experienced editors, familiar with WP:BLP and both want a better article. I really don't expect a major problem. Regards JRPG (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Great. It seems to me that the problem here is that the person cited (of who little or nothing seems to be known except that he is now deceased) is alleged to have made a statement (to whom and in what circumstances?). This statement has never been put to the test, or commented on by Portillo one way or the other. It is in fact a bit reminiscent of the McAlpine affair, where something someone is alleged to have said becomes 'common knowledge'. I don't see that, even if it were fully sourced, it in any way adds to information about Portillo or his career, and it is not therefore IMO germane to the article (in the way that, for exmaple, Tebbitt's statment is germane). There was a lot of faffle about this topic sometime ago on the article, which was removed from the record by an admistrator (not me) because of WP:BLP. I think there are therefore two issues:
  • 1) is this statement verifiable, other than having been made by the person who orginially issued it?
  • 2) even if it were, does it add anything worthwhile to the article?
My opinion, as you will gather, is no to both, and either would I think justify passing it by. There is btw another problem in that there is a quite different (living) Nigel Hart in WP. Best, --Smerus (talk) 11:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Smerus, and thanks for a courteous and clear reply, Artemus Jones in Hulton v Jones [1910] was a barrister and I'm relieved Hart isn't. For the record, I have no interest in people's sexual orientation and never initiate addition of such material -I contacted Oversight twice immediately following the Newsnight item. I edit controversial political articles and politicians of all parties, most commonly following wp:undue criticism of expenses and expect that the section will subsequently remain stable once the reasons are explained. I usually use wp:Suggested sources, include the right of reply and try to follow up with subsequent developments from other sources. In the case of Portillo, I was thrilled that an IP had actually provided a reference and I wanted to avoid immediate rewriting.
I do have first hand experience of working with Sunday Telegraph lawyers who checked very serious allegations I made against an individual. Andrew Roth who was very well respected would have been equally certain of his facts, would have had witnesses available, and would have been certain Portillo wouldn't sue. His MP profiles are used on a number of pages.
The item is relevant because what people belived (true or false) in the moral climate at the end of the 20th century impacted Portillo's chance of leadership, something that may seem strange 10 years hence. All I want to include:-
A few weeks after he had given this interview, the death of Alan Clark gave Portillo the opportunity to return to Parliament, despite Lord Tebbit accusing Portillo of lying about the extent of his sexual "deviance",[2] and similar comments from an associate included in his Guardian profile.[3]
Once that is done, I want to edit Bid for party leadership and retirement from politics
to remove the suggestion it was just right wing papers and include a summary of this from Ken Clarke. This should improve accuracy and avoid wp:undue. I'm happy alter the article along these lines and write an explanation on the talk page. Regards JRPG (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
That seems very fair to me. For the sake of clarity I would suggest that , intead of 'in his Guardian profile' (which also risks suggesting the profile was 'his', i.e. authorised by him), you write 'in a profile of Portillo in the Guardian newspaper'. In the meantime I have removed the repeated insertion of N Hart 'upfront' by the anonymous WP editor. Thanks for your work and thought on this.--Smerus (talk) 20:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
As always, a second opinion improves things. In accordance with WP:EUI I'll do it tomorrow :) JRPG (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Richelieu's speed[edit]

Dear User:JRPG You explained your edit (16:09, 10 January 2013‎ ) about Richelieu 's speed, with «Remove 'Her speed was surpassed only by the fastest U.S. Navy battleships.' Faster than contemporary US and British ships yes, but Bismarck and Littorio seem at least similar speeds». May I not completely agree ? In the Siegfried Breyer's book, «Battleships and battle cruisers 1905–1970» (1973, London, Macdonald and Jane's, ISBN 0-356-04191-3) cited in the article bibliography, we can read the Richelieu 's speed was 30 knots (p.436), as Littorio(p.386), and Bismarck was credited with 29 knots (p.300). But in the same pages, the speed reached during trial runs of 32.0 knots is indicated for Richelieu (32.13 knots for Jean-Bart), 31.42 knots for Vittorio Veneto (and 31.29 for Littorio), 30.1 knots for Bismarck (and 30.8 knots for Tirpitz).Paul-Pierre Valli (talk) 13:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Salut Paul-Pierre. The problem is that sources disagree. According to Battleships and Carriers ISBN 1-84084-327-6 Bismarke was 29 knots, Richelieu 30 knots, Vittorio Veneto 32 knots. You could say that say that according to Breyer (citation needed) her trials speed was faster than her contempories Vittorio Veneto and Bismarck. As far as I'm aware only the significantly later and therefore not really comparable IOWA class ships were faster. Do you want to do this? JRPG (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


Ed Balls[edit]

Greetings, JRPG. I'm sorry you feel that way. The main point was that I considered what you had written to be inaccurate in the way you had written it. Therefore, by removing two things that did not seem to be supported by the sources you cited I thought I was improving it. I am still not entirely happy with the edit. The suggestion was made that she did not understand child protection because she was a teacher, not a social worker. My answer would be that I have never yet met a social worker with the least understanding of child protection issues (partly because social work in this country is a shambles) whereas teachers deal with it day in and day out. So actually, it would probably have helped a lot that she had no background in child protection in the medium term. The real problem appears to be that social services were trying to hide their failings from everyone, including their own bosses. If you wanted to say that she was handicapped in her management of social services by being an ex-headteacher, that would be fine. And incidentally, I have no regard for Sharon Shoesmith and I think she should have resigned over this. Her job was to force social services into behaving responsibly and professionally, which she signally failed to do. But everyone is entitled to the due process of law - except, apparently, those who have crossed Ed Balls (or any other senior politician). Hope that helps. I was not assuming bad faith - merely a slight overstatement from the sources you were using. (PS - not sure why it only had my URL rather than username before. Hope that's now corrected.)Hcc01 (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Uhm ..I'm forced to agree that what I wrote didn't accurately follow the sources -hence the changes prompted by your edits. If we've improved the article, it's worth a few ruffled feathers! FWIW I was also on the receiving end of a constitutional round of who governs Britain, Parliament -or the monarchy in the form of the courts. I was involved in Judicial reviews and appeals with Ros Altmann and had 2 meetings with pensions minister James Purnell who overturned the Parliamentary Ombudsman's decision. I like the concept of JR's but believe that Yes Minister is fundamentally correct and it's the department not the minister of the day who makes strategic decisions like this.
The section is really maximum length for an article on Ed Balls, if you can find a suggested source that says she was handicapped in her management of social services by being an ex-head teacher, we should include it. Regards JRPG (talk) 12:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


Question for administrator[edit]

{{admin help}} Could someone advise on Christian Council of Britain? As an atheist, I've no particular viewpoint on this, but was involved in merging it with a BNP related article some time ago and want to use wp:rs.
user:RevRMBWest, a WP:SPA appears to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and I cannot get him to provide evidence that he is ordained -as others deny- or to stop editing what appears to be a fair summary of sources. Could someone ask him to provide evidence via email or whatever is appropriate? Thanks in advance. JRPG (talk) 16:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Not allowed. All editors are automatically anonymous (unless they decide otherwise) - any attempt to link a real person to a username is called WP:OUTING. A user may decide to out themselves on their own user page - but that has to be their decision and not one they are forced into. For all you know User:RevRMBWest may just be Fred Bloggs who is a fan of Rev Robert West - there is no way of knowing which is true. If you do not agree with the user's edits and (s)he will not work with you then you must consider dispute resolution  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


Godfrey Bloom[edit]

Is this really vandalism? When a high-profile person edits their own BLP, it's important that we respond carefully. I'm sure the edit was inappropriate, but not all inappropriate edits are vandalism. bobrayner (talk) 12:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Firstly we must NOT assume Atkinson1962 is Bloom under any circumstances, editing is anonymous -see wp:outing. Secondly there is a proper procedure for people affected by alleged errors. Writing all over the article appears to be vandalism to me. JRPG (talk) 13:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
I imagine the discussion could run more smoothly if you were to read policies before citing them. The lede of WP:VANDALISM says:

Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing. Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful.

The first sentence of WP:OUTING says:

Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person had voluntarily posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia.

When a single-purpose account spends a year trying to whitewash the Godfrey Bloom article, and then repeatedly adds stuff like "PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS SPURIOUS PLACE TO FIND 'FACTS' ABOUT ME, LOG IN TO MY WEBSITE", and they sign as "Godfrey Bloom MEP", it's perfectly reasonable to treat that editor as Godfrey Bloom. It's certainly not outing when I recognise that an editor has openly and repeatedly claimed to be Godfrey Bloom.
Did you provide this advice to the editor, or was it sufficient to give them a templated warning about an irrelevant policy that they didn't break? bobrayner (talk) 14:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bob. I've recently had my knuckles rapped for assuming User talk:RevRMBWest belonged to a Mr RMB West -see User_talk:JRPG#Question_for_administrator. Had Bloom used GBloom as a username, of course I would have invited him to read the advice on the talkpage, but who is Atkinson and why doesn't his page say he is Bloom? I work largely on political pages & have no problems with people of any party who understand the basics before they start writing. The user could also have emailed me. Regards JRPG (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Question for administrator[edit]

Hi. I have instigated an investigation relating to 94.72.252.104 (talk) 94.72.252.103 (talk) and others. Is it possible to stop these utterly incomprehensible I/P messages without prejudice? I note they have also spilt over onto User talk:Katwithers5 and Talk:Natascha_Engel#Changes_in_January_2014_by_94.72.252.103_.28talk.29. Thanks in advance. JRPG (talk) 12:58, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I've blocked both IPs for making legal threats; the above thread is pretty unambiguous. Yunshui  13:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks for that Yunshui . Now I can get on and do something useful. JRPG (talk) 13:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
86.135.90.128 (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Given that the above IP geolocates to the same location as the previous IP users, I've blocked it as well (though a short block this time, as it's clearly a dynamic IP). Since he's probably got access to more addresses, I've taken the step of locking your talkpage against unregistered editors, which should give you a bit of peace and quiet. Let me know if you want the protection extending/reducing. Yunshui  14:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that. The behaviour goes back to at least 2007. He has decided I am a sockpuppet of another user and his MP + the world in general is against him. JRPG (talk) 14:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Not a problem. Ping me if you need anything else. Yunshui  14:47, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


Thanks[edit]

Hello

Thank you for your advice - I have and am still in the process of amending the pages in line with your suggestions. The information contained was inaccurate / out of date - hence the edits made, however I will ensure more thorough citing as advised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EducationHoM (talkcontribs) 12:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


air france 447[edit]

I made a mistake while attempting to correct some grammar issues in the paragraph above the one I accidentally deleted when my computer froze. I do not add descriptions for these edits because saying you changed something from "an" to "a" for example is not terribly relevant. However as I very rarely use Wikipedia to edit I am unsure how things work. I am also unsure of the relevance of the information in the paragraph. Ianpatton5 (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ian, we all make mistakes ..or where I live get power cuts. 'Minor changes' ..getting the grammar right is important even if they don't change the meaning. I tick the 'this is a minor edit' box & use copy/edit as a summary then everyone knows what's happening. This is important as we have a lot of people doing 'test edits' on a live page just to see if it works!
Two more things, rather than edit the live page you may wish to write it up in your own sandbox & then copy/paste to to the article. You're given the option to create your own sandbox whenever you start editing a completely new article. The other suggestion is that you write a few words about yourself. Only regular editors do this & it adds to the feeling of trust. Hope that helps & I can encourage you to do some more. JRPG (talk) 20:04, 29 March 2014 (UTC)


Llandaff Cathedral[edit]

Hi JRPG,

Cardiff Central Library has lots of local info (on the 5th floor) if you have time. I have had a quick look around online, but I cannot see anything more than that it it sustained major damage occurred to the south-west tower of the cathedral. SethWhales talk 19:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Seth. Firstly, many thanks for taking the trouble to do this. I now live in Leicester & haven't visited for about 15 years & had hoped to find invoices for the repair damage. Although all records offices are now cutting back to an absurd level, I may see if I can try contacting someone or alternatively at the cathedral. Regards JRPG (talk) 08:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Anna Soubry may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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 my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • |alt =>
  • author=George Eaton|work=New Statesman|date=8 November 2013|accessdate=10 August 2014}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, JRPG. Please check your email – you've got mail!
Message added 03:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 03:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Question for administrator[edit]

Could someone please advise on British Exploring Society?

Very sadly this organization made international headlines when a youth was killed in Norway in 2011. The organization was heavily criticized but found not guilty of criminal negligence. An WP:SPA, User talk:British Exploring has repeatedly deleted my edits claiming they are legally obliged to do so following the inquest verdict(!) and is now adding promotional material. Please see my comments on Talk:British Exploring Society. Thanks in advance. JRPG (talk) 13:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I have user-name-soft-blocked the account, will revert his edits and explain on his talk page about COI; also that his claim is nonsense. JohnCD (talk) 13:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks John, I hadn't realized the username was also a problem. Regards JRPG (talk) 14:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2014 Israeli raids on UNRWA schools[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Israeli raids on UNRWA schools. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Douglas Carswell[edit]

Please try not to remove references from biographies of living persons, as you did in this edit. Cheers. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll try harder next time:) The references removed didn't allow provide sufficient details to allow the swing to be calculated easily. My understanding -and I may be wrong is that the constituency article references should suffice. Anyway I think the article is now better. Regards JRPG (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


Economist article on Eton[edit]

Hi JRPG, I saw your note that you plan to expand and balance the Eton article with material from a recent article in the Economist. I wanted to ask, does the Economist article mention Anthony Chenevix-Trench at all? I would guess not if it focuses on recent developments, but I'm always on the lookout for further sources even if they only say a few words.

With Chenevix-Trench available sources are a maddening mixture of glowing late 1960's BBC documentaries and equally glowing press reports of the same era, sensationalist tabloid and similar material of later eras taking the opposite view, and a more balanced and more detailed biography that unfortunately is somewhat self-published. Can't win! Thanks. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:15, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Belated greetings Demiurge I want to provide info in connection with how the school keeps its academic record & a measure of its performance independent of "the old boy network." Following your request, I looked at various articles about AC-T and ..you're right, this is a difficult one. There's quite a lot of non-encyclopedia quality material with allegations of sadistic behaviour but I couldn't find anything better than what you already have. In short, I think you've already found all you are going to get. Regards JRPG (talk) 16:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Application of sharia law by country[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Application of sharia law by country. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Rob Marris.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Rob Marris.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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

John Major[edit]

I've written a comment to the talk page on the John Major article; it is something you also discussed last year. I wanted to give you a heads up about it before editing the article itself. Purplethree (talk) 14:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Firstly greetings Purple & welcome to my talk page. I edit mostly politicians and shipwrecks, both are surprisingly contentious! I've never got involved in a serious dispute with a non-I/p who uses talk pages and have never had discussions which haven't ended with both sides fairly satisfied. In short, this issue can/will be sorted. Regards JRPG (talk) 15:31, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 10 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:49, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stephen Dorrell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nicky Morgan. 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) 11:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

AfD[edit]

Please delete your second vote in the Libertarian Party AfD [4]. Relisting does not mean those who voted in the first listing have another chance to vote, it is a continuation of the same AfD. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for removing it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Karl McCartney Change yesterday[edit]

I made the change to this page as what was there when I read it was factually incorrect and biased. Many of the media outlets amended the story as Karl did not respond to the tweet in question by Richard Davies (as the Telegraph article points out) but made a reply to another user much later in the day who had picked up on the debate. In truth this whole section is little more than a biased attempt to smear Mr McCarney and I as a life-long friend feel that this really has no place on Wikipedia and especially as you claim to be against any bias Millionblade (talk) 09:15, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Millionblade and thanks for your comments, FWIW I don't use twitter at all. I read articles carefully but had missed the point that the response was apparently aimed at a 3rd party. Editing Wikipedia is often contentious, as a general point you may want to look at WP:AGF and WP:COI. Regards JRPG (talk) 21:07, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charlie Elphicke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CSC. 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) 09:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Straw Poll[edit]

There is a straw poll that may interest you regarding the proper use of "Religion =" in infoboxes of atheists.

The straw poll is at Template talk:Infobox person#Straw poll.

--Guy Macon (talk) 09:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicky Morgan (politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wellington College. 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) 09:17, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

RfC United States same-sex marriage map[edit]

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 (talk) 10:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sri Lankan presidential election, 2015[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sri Lankan presidential election, 2015. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:BUSM 1916 Shell casing manufacture.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:BUSM 1916 Shell casing manufacture.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 15:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Obituaries:Maurice Chauvet". Daily Telegraph. 7 June 2010. Retrieved 8 June 2010. 
  2. ^ "Tebbit hits out at Portillo 'deviance'". BBC News. 24 September 1999. Retrieved 21 November 2007. 
  3. ^ Andrew Roth (20 March 2001). "Guardian profile:Michael Portillo". Guardian newspapers. Retrieved 14 December 2012.