User talk:Mauls

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

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

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

University Court
added a link pointing to Vice-chancellor
University council
added a link pointing to Vice-chancellor

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Drei Marc[edit]

Hello Mauls,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Drei Marc for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Local Nature Reserve[edit]

Mauls, you might have looked at the talk page — or at least at the history, where my move in September was just three lines down — before unilaterally moving Local Nature Reserve back to the lower-case version. There's discussion there. Please take part. Meanwhile, I've reverted your move. Bishonen | talk 11:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC).

Strongly agree. The capitals are significant, they indicate a significance that goes beyond the meaning of the individual words, and should not have been removed. There's a difference between a "local nature reserve" and a "Local Nature Reserve". My local nature reserve is Kinder Scout – but Kinder Scout is a National Nature Reserve. This modern obsession with minimizing capital letters is a nonsense (I disagreed with WP:BIRDCON too – not all common gulls are Common Gulls) and we lose a shade of meaning – and gain nothing in return – by this weird obsession with removing capitals. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:17, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
So I see you've ignored my suggestion at Talk:Local nature reserve and you're continuing to make these contentious edits before consensus has been established. Nice. Dave.Dunford (talk) 20:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Strongly agree with comments above. Mauls must not make these edits, unless consensus is established for their changes. I have reverted their edit to Stokenchurch Gap for the same reason. David J Johnson (talk) 13:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

National Character Areas and Natural Areas of England[edit]

Hi Mauls. I'm sure you changed these titles to lower case in good faith, but I think you'll find that they're officially spelt in title case by Natural England (who designate them) even in the middle of a sentence. See [1] and [2]. Would you be kind enough to revert the changes. --Bermicourt (talk) 13:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely agree with Bermicourt's comments above and the comments in the previous paragraph. I have reverted Mauls edits to Stokenchurch Gap, pending consensus. David J Johnson (talk) 13:22, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Links to the articles under discussion are being left whilst being debated, pending consensus, but the revert was in relation to a completely different article, national nature reserve (United Kingdom), and a correction of a link to the generic national nature reserve. There is no open discussion of the capitalisation of this article. There were also copyedit changes that were improperly reverted. Check before snap reverting! Mauls (talk) 10:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I did check and the article states "National Nature Reserve (United Kingdom). Please stop lecturing and discuss. David J Johnson (talk) 11:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
There is no discussion on the talk page for national nature reserve (United Kingdom). The previous comments related to three entirely different articles; if you want to start a discussion relating to the national nature reserve article, you are welcome to do so.
I also don't understand your claim to have checked what you were reverting - why did you point the link back to national nature reserve, the generic article rather than the UK designation? Also, why did you capitalise 'public enquiry', and why did you revert a correction of a missing apostrophe on 'inspector's decision'? You can see what you changed at [3]
Mauls (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I realise they are different articles. My concern in all articles concerned is that you seem to be obsessed with reverting titles to lower case without sufficient explanation. I really feel you should be answering the various editors concerns listed in the above paragraphs. Please don't lecture me about "starting a discussion", I have plenty of experience of editing here. Regarding "public enquiry" it can be used either way - which once again - shows your obsession with reverting to lower case. Frankly, I have more important things to do both in business and Wikipedia - but you need to answer the other contributors points. David J Johnson (talk) 16:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
I have already contributed multiple times to the ongoing discussion. Mauls (talk) 11:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of Swiss Cycling.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo of Swiss Cycling.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Glenlough for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Glenlough is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenlough until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Crosby Cross-Roads for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crosby Cross-Roads is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crosby Cross-Roads until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:48, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Ballahutchin Hill for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ballahutchin Hill is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ballahutchin Hill until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Sulby Bridge for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sulby Bridge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sulby Bridge until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Ginger Hall for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ginger Hall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ginger Hall until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Gardener's Lane for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gardener's Lane is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gardener's Lane until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Central Electricity Generating Board, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minister of Power. 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) 09:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

York, pre-Grouping[edit]

Hi, whilst this revert was valid, your reasoning is not: the NER owned the station and the neighbouring lines, but several other companies ran services into York by virtue of running powers: the Great Central; the Great Eastern; the Great Northern; the Lancashire & Yorkshire; the London & North Western; and the Midland. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited York railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Eastern Railway. 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) 09:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Global account[edit]

Hi Mauls! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of School House Corner for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article School House Corner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/School House Corner until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:41, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Fee tail[edit]

Merge-arrows.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Fee tail, has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. MiguelMadeira (talk) 11:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC) --MiguelMadeira (talk) 11:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Infobox Isle of Man TT course[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Infobox Isle of Man TT course requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Arthur Jenkins Indemnity Act 1941 listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Arthur Jenkins Indemnity Act 1941. Since you had some involvement with the Arthur Jenkins Indemnity Act 1941 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Compassionate727 (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2015 (UTC)