User talk:Ddstretch

	SandBoxes
	New Table of Civil Parishes classified by Settlement /Sandbox 2

	Archives
	1: July 2006 - November 2006 2

Welcome to Ddstretch's talk page.

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please use a new ==Descriptive heading== for new topics.
Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply).
I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to Watch this page until you are responded to.

⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

wikEd

The wikEdlogo

Hi, I have seen that you are using the Cacycle editor extension. This program is no longer actively maintained in favor of its much more powerful successor wikEd.

wikEd has all the functionality of the old editor plus: • syntax highlighting • nifty image buttons • more fixing buttons • paste formatted text from Word or web pages • convert the formatted text into wikicode • adjust the font size • and much, much more.

Switching to wikEd is easy, check the detailed installation description on its project homepage. Often it is as simple as changing every occurrence of editor.js into wikEd.js on your User:YourUsername/monobook.js page.

Cacycle 22:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I'll give it a go to see if I can get it to work. _DDS talk 15:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Dealing with vandals of Stoke-on-Trent

Thanks for the pointer. SoT (and the football team) does attract a fair bit of vandalism! Beest 17:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Lichfield (district); Etruria Hall; South Staffordshire; Cannock Chase (district); Wilnecote; City of Chester; Staffordshire Moorlands; East Staffordshire; Tunstall, Staffordshire; Newcastle-under-Lyme (borough); Erewash; Fenton, Staffordshire; Upton, Cheshire; South Derbyshire; Flashcard; Jishou; Chester Cathedral; The Laughing Clowns; Stonydelph

Cleanup: Decimal separator; List of Portuguese given names; P. V. Narasimha Rao
Merge: Potassium nitrate; Lionhead Studios; Northwich
Add Sources: Oakley Hall; Leading small group; Hopwood, Worcestershire
Wikify: Jugurthine War; Niujie Mosque; Rainworth
Expand: Comparison of web servers; Immediate Action Unit; China Western Development

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 15:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chester entry

Thanks for your comment. I personally don't know much about England, or Chester or the surrounding area. I made an edit of a list that I saw was confusing. The list showed a location then a comma then another location or several. this continued on almost every line of the list. I dropped the commas and put every location on it's own line. I do agree that the locations that are part of the city of Chester belong in that area and the locations that are part of the greater county should be left. I would love to help but I wouldn't know where to start. It might be better that you make the changes you were talking about. If there is anything that I can do to help let me know. photodude 01:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the new list is more logic. I think it should be carried over to all the UK county and city pages. but, I wonder if some people will see it as a formatting mistake. the commas were bad, bullets are better; do you think there might be an even better way to show this relation in the locations? Thanks for makeing the changes. photodude 01:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think people are working on this problem in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK subdivisions. As for how the formatting is done, I think bullets make it look better, speaking for myself. I don't think there is any hard and fast rule about it, though. _DDS talk 01:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated vandalism

Hi there; I saw your accidental page about an IP vandal. Do you know the page WP:AIV?--Anthony.bradbury 22:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer. I have used that page before (WP:AIV), but I somehow got to the wrong page and got mixed up when using it. I'll report the ipaddresses where you have suggested. Thanks again. _DDS talk 22:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have reported the ipaddresses at WP:AN/I. Once again, thanks. _DDS talk 22:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Places of interest

Just a pointer but take a look at Cornwall with the logos for English Heritage etc. They work very nicely. Regan123 00:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - they look good, and I think we should use them on Cheshire-related articles (even if the proposed project does not get off the ground.) DDStretch talk 16:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheshire WikiProject

Nice idea. I've joined. I'm starting a few stubs on Cheshire villages, feel free to help me expand them... I'd appreciate it! --SunStar Net^talk 02:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, and thanks for joining. Would it be an idea to list what you have added in the appropriate place on the project's talk page? You may get a lot more other people joining in and helping that way. I'll help as well, of course! DDStretch (talk) 12:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Devon project and Borrowing, etc

I've borrowed your project page to start my Wikipedia: Wikiproject Devon page. hope you don't mind... Totnesmartin 18:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. Please feel free to take and make use of anything about the [[WP:Cheshire|Cheshire WikiProject}} you feel would be useful. If you improve what you borrow, may be we will come back and re-borrow the improved one from you! Seriously, anything that can help us both improve the coverage of our respective counties can, I think, be shared with no problem. Congratulations on getting the project up and running. Already, I can see some things that might be useful for us to borrow! DDStretch (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity... Are you including former parts of Cheshire, such as the Wirral? Totnesmartin 01:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't explicitly discussed that yet, but I think it is assumed that at the moment we won't be. It will take all our efforts to get articles for the current ceremonial county of Cheshire up to standard. DDStretch (talk) 01:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lyme Handley

As far as I know and according to the Macclesfield BC website there still is a parish called Lyme Handley. There isn't exactly a settlement called that as it is the area which is between Disley and Pott Shrigley - mainly Lyme Park. -- Phildav76 22:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I've realised now that the map is partly in error here, and reverted my edit to the list. DDStretch (talk) 22:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that guys.JFBurton 19:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Villages in Cheshire

I note you've added templates to a couple of Crewe & Nantwich village articles I started. You might like to note that a page for Marbury (in your template as Marbury cum Quoiseley) already exists. Espresso Addict 00:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. However, the list I've been working on so far are for civil parishes within Cheshire, and Marbury may be but one settlement within the civil parish of Marbury cum Quoiseley. I need to check. If Marbury is the only settlement within Marbury cum Quoiseley there are a number of easy ways of resolving the issue (redirects, etc). I've written about this kind of issue at length on the Cheshire WikiProject's talk page.

In many cases, people have not distinguished enough between a settlement and a civil parish. When a civil parish contains more than one settlement, it becomes difficult to manage for all sorts of reasons unless one has separate articles for civil parishes and for settlements (categories of settlements versus categories of villages, etc is but one; the parish being named differently from the settlement it contains is another, albeit minor one, solvable by redirection). I think we have effectively reached a consensus in the project about separating these out, as a result of the information given on the talk page, and some previous precedents set by, for example, the Cornwall project work. As a few examples in Cheshire, the civil parish of Haslington contains the settlements: Haslington, Oakhanger, Winterley, and (part of) Wheelock Heath. As another Anderton with Marbury contains two settlements: Anderton, and Marbury. The person who was writing about this last civil parish had a difficulty and the solution has been to write about the civil parish separately from its contained settlements. We think this is a more logical solution which fits in more with the hiearchy of local government within Cheshire. We are still in the process of trying to sort the details out, but I want to thank you for letting me know about this, and Marbury will be referred to and linked to, certainly, if the article about the civil parish is written. Otherwise, we may edit the entry for Marbury a little to have a section purely about the parish, a section about its settlement, and then add a redirection to it for "Marbury cum Quoiseley". DDStretch (talk) 00:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you are on top of this issue. I think people are more likely to search for places than parishes, but as long as the two link/redirect properly and there isn't too much duplication of material there should be no problem. In this case in particular, I'm not aware of there being much of a settlement at Quoisley; as I recall, there's a couple of houses, but it's mainly meres, marsh, woodland & farmland. Espresso Addict 05:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Wiki Project

Chill Out About It. I thought that if you were so interested in the Cheshire one, mabye you would be in the Derbyshire one too. I still hope you can at least pretend to be interested, just to help it get started.JFBurton 16:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Thanks for cleaning up that vandalism. That was pretty extreme. JFBurton 08:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thats a good idea. I saw that strange vandalism on your page, couldnt get my head round it, and I cant get my head round the fact that the same IP vandalises me and Billlion's user page. Well, I can get my head round it, but dont understand why. And the person who vandalised my user page obviously knows something about my REAL life, because he mentioned a friend of mine. If you look in my page history, you will see. The same user also knows that Billlion bought a range rover. JFBurton 17:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

waverton, cheshire

that wasnt me it was my friend who did all the 'work' on the page i apologise for him, i didnt realise he was on my computer. as for jack woods, i admit that was me and have taken on your wishes and shall not do this again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.135.244.67 (talk) 00:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Vandalism

I see that IP is still vandalising your page. I was about to revert it but you came along at just the right time. ~ JFBurton 18:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It appears to be a reaction to a slightly more "sophisticated" vandalism I reversed a short time ago to Fallibroome High School (you may have heard of the school). An anon user vandalised it, then a non-anon user appeared to revert it, but really just added more vandalism which was prepared for in advance (you can find out the gory details of this if you look at who did what and when, and my reports of this, in the logs.) DDStretch (talk) 18:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

80.47.134.29 has vandalismed my page again. Its very strange what he does. Can you explain it. I know Fallibroome High School, its on the far side of Macclesfield, near Prestbury. ~ JFBurton 09:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That same IP has now done it again today to your discussion page, I reverted it. This time he claims he wants your babies. ~ JFBurton 20:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dee bridge disaster

The internal reference comes in my Wiki article, but I have also also added a paper we wrote some time ago about the accident. I will also add my forthcomng book, when I get a copy from my publisher.Peterlewis 17:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Argh! Hello, thanks for your reply. Don't add a reference to your own book, as wikipedia has a policy about No Original research (WP:NOR), which I think is a bit over the top, but which is rigorously enforced. It is why I have never edited any articles about my own areas of scientific research and specialty, even though the existing articles on the subject are quite poor. Get someone else to add your book as a reference. I don't unfortunately, see this policy as ever changing really, which is very very sad. DDStretch (talk) 19:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Manchester dynamic map

Hi Ddstretch! Thanks for the contact and feedback! It seems the map have been well recieved, but with a few pointers to consider.

I think you raise an important suggestion about the pointer. I hadn't considered this and presumed this formed part of a universal (or WikiWide) icon. I'll contact the UK infobox architects and find out what options we have.

If you like the GM map, I'd be happy to look into the possibility of a Cheshire based one for your WikiProject. Once I have the source material it only takes me a few hours. Jhamez84 19:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And now you have one - may have errors as my material for the county is not as comprehensive. Regardless, its here for peer review if you are interested? Would be nice if we can at least have a standard style of map for the North West to begin with. Jhamez84 00:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've missed a borough boundary between Vale Royal and Congleton! I'll pop this in along with anything else you suggest. Hope it is suitable for at least an article if not the infobox. Jhamez84 00:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Glad to help out. I've ammended a few errors I made (such as removed a stretch of motorway I'd seemed to have invented, and extended the River Dee to its correct course. Hope it proves to be useful. Jhamez84 12:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rolex Copies

I recently added to you article on Rolex copies. I was surprised to find it was marked at vandalism. My cotribution towards your page was topical, informative and contained nothing offencive! Just what makes you think that is vandalism? My contribution was a correct fact, I have been to Canal Street in New York City, and i have seen these copies. One thing is for certain, they are a damn site better than the picture you provided. My information, was thus more factual than your's! Yet I am still cautioned for vandalism! Thanks fot nothing! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oli120792 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Sandbach School

I reacently read an article about Sandbach School, I edited a bit on your page about the current head master. Samuel Smith is not the current head master, Peter Wiles is. I know this as I attend this school.