This user is a native speaker of the English language.

Deze gebruiker heeft een middelmatige kennis van het Nederlands.

Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mjroots.

Please add new comments at the bottom of the relevant section if it already exists - e.g. Railways, Places, Ships, Aircraft & Airlines etc. Please add new subjects to the bottom of the relevant section; If you are unsure where to add your contribution, the "New messages" section at the bottom of the page will be fine. I'll move it myself if necessary.

Please note: I do not watch article talk pages. If you wish to raise an issue, please drop me a note here.

If your post is an Admin-related matter, please post it in the Admin section on this page. If you e-mail me, please leave a note in the "New Messages" section of my talk page so that I am aware one has been sent.

Barnstars

If you feel that I deserve a barnstar, please add it here.

For barnstars I've been awarded, see here

DYK & ITN

This user has written or expanded 163 articles featured in the Did You Know section on the Main Page.

My DYKs are on this sub-page.

		The 25 DYK Medal
		For achieving your 25th Did You Know? I hereby award you this big fat medal. Well done. *Hersfold* ^(t/a/c) 23:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The 50 DYK Medal
		Trams, mills, railways ... I think Isambard would have been proud of your approach particulary the French ideas, but he would have barred our veteran editor from further progression for supporting a railway that was merely a metre. But he's not here! So more seriously, thank you on behalf of the wiki. (Let me tell you though that the 100 one s a really cool yellowy gold colour). Good luck with the GA and cheers Victuallers (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The 100 DYK Medal
		As I told you at 50 ... the 100 DYK medal is a really cool shade of yellow. I hope you are not disappointed, as the wiki is not regretful at all of your efforts. Well done. The wiki gets better due to your contributions and its a pleasure to thank you again on behalf of the wiki. See you at 200? Victuallers (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dyks

Your welcome ... ask the two people you nominated! They count too Victuallers (talk) 13:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April Fools DYK?

Hey, MJ, would you be interested in collaborating with me on an April Fools double DYK nom? I'm looking to add two ship articles: one from the WWI era, and one from the WWII era. I thought if you were interested, you could write the WWII-era article. Let me know if you're interested, and I can fill in the details. Thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you could write an article for the Ellerman Lines ship SS Lesbian (1923), I'll write about their former SS Lesbian (1915). I was thinking about a hook like this:

…that the Ellerman Lines employed two Lesbians in the early 20th century but both met with tragic fates in the Mediterranean, one in World War I, and the other in World War II?

Other than the usual sources available, like Plimsoll, Convoyweb, etc.; I've found a source for the second one that might be helpful: Here (I also thought of an alternative hook involving only the latter ship, but I'm pretty sure it would be too ribald for the Main Page.) — Bellhalla (talk) 13:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd seen that there was an older one, but Miramar showed it as Leyland Line (I think). How about either:

…that the Ellerman Lines employed three Lesbians in the early 20th century but two met with tragic fates in the Mediterranean, one in World War I, and the other in World War II?

or:

…that John Ellerman employed not one, not two, but three lesbians in the early 20th century?

This will give a little context and helps avoid the rather suggestive had. If we want to get suggestive, we could always use only the third ship and say:

"…that you can pay to go down on a Lesbian in Beirut?

(no offense intended to anyone reading this.) — Bellhalla (talk) 00:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

number DYK

I've noticed over the past few weeks that you seem to be on fire for Mills and other articles including Camberwell. Congrats on the 90+. Btw, if you do Braughing, i have a small bit of info on trade (or copy if from Buntingford Branch Line). Simply south (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ITN

On 30 June, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2009 Viareggio train derailment, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 10:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 July, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Aria Air Flight 1525, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 02:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 November 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2009 Great Britain and Ireland floods, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 December 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article MV Danny F II, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 15:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 March 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article ROKS Cheonan (PCC-772), which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

I saw you were the main contributor to the article, but there were a few other names too. If you think I have missed somebody feel free to copy paste this to them as well. Many thanks - Dumelow (talk) 11:53, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--I'm not sure congratulations would be appropriate given the subject matter, but well done on getting the article (I seem to be ITN's unofficial postman). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Merano train derailment, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Two in as many days- impressive. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:40, 12 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]

On 6 May 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article MV Moscow University, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:34, 6 May 2010 (UTC) [reply]

On 12 May 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Btw, this edit summary made me chuckle! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

Old discussions are archived here.

Hungarian names for Romanian places

Hello Mjroots,

You made a ruling in the discussion Hungarian names for Romanian places here:

[1]

In the discussion there were 3 participants: Iadrian yu (talk · contribs), Umumu (talk · contribs), Amon Koth (talk · contribs) versus Rokarudi (talk · contribs). The status quo before the discussion was according to a compromise reached by a greater number of editors in Odorhei Secuiesc discussion. As Rokarudi pointed out, according to this compromise the specific rules for Transylvania were the following : Romanian titles, Romanian and Hungarian names in the infobox (if =E2==89=A520), Romanian names in bold and Hungarian ones (for anywhere in Transylvania, even if <20%) in italics, and also German names if applicable. After the ruling, one of the participants Umumu was proven to be a sock-puppet of Iaaasi and indefinitely banned from editing Wikipedia (although he got a promise for possibility of returning by administrator Excirial that could happen some month later if and only if he refrain from making sockpuppets and editing controversial topics). The other participant, Amon Koth, never had any single edit on Wikipedia, therefore, his opinion may not be regarded as an opinion that creates a new consensus. Please revise your ruling as the majority opinion accepted by you as a new consensus was based on the opinion of banned editors and editor without edits.Very best wishes.--Nmate (talk) 09:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template problem.

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Iadrian yu's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

iadrian (talk) 10:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: linking a foto file to a name in an article

I saws this question and I thought I'd ask you about this on your page. Since the artist is dead, wouldn't it qualify as NFCC 1 No free equivalent, the artist is dead, it'a self portrait and definetly not reproduceable. Or am I mis-understanding? KoshVorlonNaluboutes,Aeria Gloris 13:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mjroots Contact info

Dear Mjroots, may you plz write me your e-mail address. I have one question and would like to e-mail that to you.

Many thanks --Shayan7 (talk · contribs) 11:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re-send

Hi, thanks, may you please send it again. I changed something in my preference. thanks again --Shayan7 12:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shayan7 (talk • contribs)

e-mail problem solved

I solved the e-mail problem. I will be grateful if you for the last time re-sent that. Many thanks. Shayan7 --Shayan7 12:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shayan7 (talk • contribs)

User Rokarudi

Hello, since we all talked a lot I would like to ask for help on an old matter. User:Rokarudi after this has started again with disruptive editing [2], [3] and [4] with clear intentions of edit warring. Since if i say it to him it is an "offense" if you could clarify this latest violation. Thank you.iadrian (talk) 11:28, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771

Hey MJ Roots,
Re. User_talk:Mdb10usa at Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771 they are a real new editor who got into a bit of bother when they started on April 23. FYI, I have welcomed them, requested edit summarys, warned about sources etc. I was going to tell you about that talk post, seemingly a response to my posts to them, but you got there first. Answer when, where, if you wish as I am overdue (UTC+10) to go offline. Thanks! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 15:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft & Airlines

Earlier discussions are archived here

Good Article Review of BOAC Flight 712

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Talk:BOAC Flight 712/GA1.
Message added 22:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at MWOAP's talk page.
Message added 10:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

-- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 10:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re British Airways 146 incident

Hello, i have reverted your reversion on the 146 incident as the pilot was blown out of the aicraft, the pressure was greater inside the aircraft than the outside as the fuselage is pressurised at altitude and the air becomes thinner the higher up you go. There was no suction as the aircraft would have to be in a vacuum for such a thing to happen, aeroplanes operate in the atmosphere otherwise without the air they would not be able to fly and the engines would not run.

Ps i am an aircraft engineer!

Zippyandgeorge (talk) 07:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply it is duly noted!

Regards

Zippyandgeorge (talk) 07:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions to Polish air crash

Please could there be a review of the AFD. It is rare for me to disagree with decisons in admin land, but take a look at User:Ianmacm/Sandbox1. 106 citations for one death, is this really necessary?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Is version in line with an AfD decision (made over 65kb of discussion two days ago) a wrong version? Simple question, simple answer please.--Avala (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might be an optimist but hoping that there will be any will for some discussion after the draining AfD and especially with a user that openly ignores warnings because "others tried to warn him before" and says that the community "gets things wrong a lot" and continues to revert them is a bit too optimist. Plus where does this end? How do you imagine this ends? If we got a result in an official process but one user thinks that this content is "shite", "silliness", "ignorable" and "rote platitudes" and goes on with reverts. We can discuss but it will lead nowhere, we will say yes, he will say no a few dozen times and then what? Even the deletion review makes little sense, he will ignore that too. And this experience that there is no will to protect even the AfD decisions from two days ago tells me that we will not have any better results with protecting deletion review results (not to mention how unfair and undemocratic it is to start a review 2 days after the AfD as I can't see what new thing will be brought to the community).

As for the article specific issue you raised, on my part I tried to overcome this by placing it within the collapsible template.--Avala (talk) 19:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Geotags

Geo Links and Geograph

There are problems with your suggestion- which is the reason I haven't done it. There is a discussion forum Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates that is discussing the whole thing. The crux is that many people are unhappy if the link goes to one site, no matter how useful, and believes that the link should only go to GeoHack, where the reader can choose the map they want. There are a lot of unhappy people there. I have a problem with the way we are doing the conversion. It looks great, but if we edit either gridref or the location then the other doesn't change. In looking for a solution, I have been looking at the maths and a lot doesn't add up, this coupled with the volatility of forum, I have been hanging back. ClemRutter (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, and thanks for the contact. To me this looks good, but (and it is a big but) I'm afraid the issue appears more complex and contentious than I had first anticipated. I'm also not particularly "clued-up" about which system is good and which is bad, which seems to be part of an ongoing debate. All I know is that there should be a standard system, and these should be included as part of the text for settlements in the UK. Have you taken this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates? -- Jza84 · (talk) 23:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox geotags- looks as it will take some time. Its on my list! ClemRutter (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checking inline geotags

Now the accuracy of OStoWiki has been corrected (+/- 2m) all previous references may need tweaking.
The GeoHack tool now has a new interface and at the bottom of the GB section, under the dangerously inaccurate grid reference is a fantastic tool called Map of all Coordinates in article.
I tried it on the Loose stream, and because of it I I'm going to make another tweak to OStoWiki.

ClemRutter (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is perfectly safe to use: the next tweak will be an enhancementClemRutter (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oscoor

Thanks for the reminder. Although I use OS maps within multimap to find things, multimap gives DMS output, and the numbering of the OS gridlines in the display tends to be hidden; so I tend to think I'm not ever going to use {{oscoor}}. However your intervention did cause me to go back and read the national grid system article, so as to understand the resolution of various lengths of OS coordinate. As I would not have done this without your intervention; thanks! --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with gbmapping and oscoor templates

Hi, There seems to be a small inaccuracy in the translation of OSGB coords to WGS84. I've mentioned it here and here but haven't found anyone who might be able to fix it. Do you know where it would be best to raise it, please?--Cavrdg (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mills

Earlier discussions are archived here

100 mills

Hi Mjroots, congratulations with 100 mill articles about dutch windmills on en-wikipedia. At least counted from the interwiki's to 'en' on the dutch wikipedia here. (number 100 will show up this night.) Akoopal (talk) 20:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know you didn't do all. Still you created number 100 :-) Always nice to mention milestones. Akoopal (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK hook for Lille Mølle

Yeah, I saw that. Your comment was a little ambiguous, did you mean you can speak Danish? If you've read the source yourself, I think we could AGF the hook, it's a pretty simple hook and there's not much chance you might have misread it. Gatoclass (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, look, I'm afraid I can't spend any more time reviewing hooks tonight, I was going to quit 45 minutes ago but then had to respond to a couple of queries. If someone else hasn't reviewed it by then, I'll run it through Google translate myself tomorrow. Gatoclass (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People

Earlier discussions are archived here

Selena

Hey there Mjroots, not sure if you noticed, but Alwaysshawn (talk · contribs) reverted your edit in Selena after I brought it up at WP:ANI. Thought I'd let you know. — ξ ^xplicit 23:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Barnett Humphreys

Hello Mjroots, having you by chance some information about John Barnett Humphreys. Please have a look at de:John Barnett Humphreys. We have no information about the birthday, the live after return to England and the death of him. Thank you for help. --Beaverbear (talk) 18:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Fryatt

Hopefully this is the right section. :) The problem with Charles Fryatt is that when the article was created it copied the contents of [5], which includes contents by two different writers from two different sources, neither of which would appear to be pd. The situation was discovered this morning, evidently, and listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 December 9 by User:Jackyd101, who also noted the issue at Main Page/Errors. Evidently, the DYK hook was already on the front page at that time. User:Materialscientist said he would "try to fix that article in a moment" in response to the Main Page/Errors report, but I can't see that he did anything? He's a busy fellow, and nothing pops in his edit summaries. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the panic. I'd have felt the same way, I'm sure. :) I'm still a bit confused and kind of alarmed about how all of this went down. As far as I can tell, nothing was done to delink that copyvio from the front page even though an administrator was notified of it and acknowledged that notification hours before the DYK update. Obviously, this is no fault of yours (and I've have been pretty bummed to lose a DYK myself because somebody else violated copyright), but that doesn't shine a good light on the project--admins ignoring copyvios. I think I need to bring this up at DYK. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, the copyvio was nothing to do with you. I'm just shocked that somebody pointed it out and the complaint was archived without action. That was nothing to do with you, either. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, I've raised the matter here. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

←Wow! I'll say. :D Would you like me to go ahead and process it (being still an uninvolved admin and all)? Even if we get permission for the earlier text, we can just restore it under, since this is scads better. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's the main reason that I would do it, but, no, I don't think it would be a problem for you to do it yourself. It doesn't technically qualify for G12, since it doesn't meet the criteria. Generally, we'd keep it listed for a week at CP and then delete it under that criteria in the pull-down menu. But when a new article is written to replace an old one, I will usually delete the first under G6, with a note of explanation something like: "Copyright violation foundational. New article written to replace." (Only usually I'm sure I'm not that long-winded.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Allingham

Ah yes - much much better that way round - wish I'd thought of that! Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buglism!

Ha! You're quite right, I did mean to do something about that: thanks for the reminder. But please don't hold your breath - an honest answer to your question would be something like: "paining me from time to time, but unlikely to prove fatal, thank you." With all good wishes, DBaK (talk) 18:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Campbell

See my comments at WP:AN. I've never heard of her either, until tonight, but there was an AfD just last month to not allow an article on her. The editor is edit warring to keep creating the article, even though it's been salted. Woogee (talk) 07:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They've been indef blocked for repeatedly creating the article. Woogee (talk) 07:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Carr

Article looks good so far. I agree with you the old page needed to be moved now we have more than one notable Sarah Carr. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of people from Doncaster

Re your recent edit to the list, in what way was my edit Vandalism? What objection do you have to the only civilian female outright winner of the George Cross appearing on this list. Barbara Jane Harrison completed her schooling in Doncaster and began her short working life there too. Mjroots (talk) 18:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No objection at all! It would seem that i reverted one revision to far when removing these vandalism edits, catching Barbara Jane Harrison as collateral damage. Quite naturally i have reinstated her to her proper place on this list, which should nor be free of bogus and vandalism entries as well. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll put my administrative sledgehammer back in its box then.

. Mjroots (talk) 19:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Earlier discussions are archived here

Copyrighted images

Note to self

When uploading copyrighted images, remember to use {{Non-free fair use in}} and {{Fair use rationale}}.

Deletion review

I have posted a question at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Image:Sarre86.jpg which you may be able to answer. Can you please return to that discussion to answer it? Stifle (talk) 11:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geograph

I have a bot on Wikimedia Commons that uploads photographs from Geograph:

I've also upload a lot using my regular account:

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php?wikifam=commons.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=Edward

Edward (talk) 19:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License for Image:Image:Stiens 1974-1.jpg

200px|right|Stiens 1974-1.jpg

The image :Image:Stiens 1974-1.jpg is a candidate to be copied to the Wikimedia Commons. When you uploaded this image, you licensed it for use under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). On behalf of the Wikipedia and Commons communities, thank you. However, the GFDL requires that reproductions of the image (and any other GFDL-licenced works), must be accompanied by the full text of the GFDL. The GFDL is intended more for documentation and not images, so downstream re-users may be hindered by additional restrictions of the GFDL which may not work well on the use of one image.

Before I copy this image to the Commons, I wanted to ask whether you would be willing to multilicense your work under an additional license, such as a Creative Commons licence. Creative Commons licences, such as the Attribution Share-Alike license provide a similar copyleft permission to the GFDL, but without some of its requirements such as the distribution of the licence text. All you need to do, is place the additional license tag alongside your current license. Users can choose between which one they want to use the image under. There are many free licenses accepted on Wikipedia and Commons which can provide freedoms similar to the GFDL, but without some of its requirements.

You are under no obligation whatsoever to alter the license. Doing so merely cooperates with those members of the community who believe that multilicensing your work can ease the reuse of images outside of Wikipedia.

If you use a GFDL license tag which requires distribution of Wikipedia's general disclaimer (indicated by "Subject to disclamiers" in the template), it is also suggested that you switch it to one which does not apply them.

Whether or not you choose to dual-license your work, thank you for your consideration.

Please also see Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons for more information. This message was placed using Template:Dual-licence.

Thanks! --Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Horse tram, Southampton.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Horse tram, Southampton.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Horse tram, Southampton.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. B G^7even 13:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:SS LESBIAN (3).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:SS LESBIAN (3).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HMS Archer (D78)

Thanks for your message on my talk page [6]. My memory of image uploads from four years ago is more than a little hazy, but I will try to help as best I can. Searches at Haze Gray and the Naval Historical Center turned up nothing quite like the photo in question, but I think I found it at NavSource [7]. The image there has "IWM" listed for "Contributed By And/Or Copyright." Today I presume that stands for the Imperial War Museum, but back in 2005 I probably did not know and just assumed it fell under the "Or Images Believed To Be In The Public Domain" listed on the site's copyright information page [8]. However four years later (and with a significantly better understanding of WP:IUP), I recognize that is not a good assumption to make. I also tried searching the Imperial War Museum web site, but while I found a similar photo [9], I could not find this image.

How do you feel we should proceed from here? My recollection is that after uploading around a dozen images of escort carriers in September 2005, I decided that my understanding of IUP was not nuanced enough and I stopped. These images should probably be reviewed and deleted as necessary. I will double-check with a MILHIST coordinator and if they concur, I will start sometime this week. Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks for your patience, — Kralizec! (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Thelnetham derelict.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Thelnetham derelict.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) 14:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done

NowCommons: File:Sklr-oldmap.jpg

File:Sklr-oldmap.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Bowaters Paper Railway-old map.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Bowaters Paper Railway-old map.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:MV Danny F II.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:MV Danny F II.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Peripitus (Talk) 12:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And File:MV Don Carlos.jpg - can you go back through your last few uploads as you seem to have missed an important step - Peripitus (Talk) 12:50, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Peripitus (Talk) 12:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Mjroots (talk) 13:06, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Places

Earlier discussions are archived here

Bradford City Hall

Hi. Thanks for your question. I'm ashamed to say I've never been to Bradford City Hall, even though I wrote the article on it. I'd love to go. I did speak to a local journo who said that it was OK to take photos in there, though. (Some town halls are a bit weird about photos; no-one has told them about panoramafreiheit.) Anyway, what I could do for you is to phone Bradford Council tomorrow and if I'm lucky I'll get some bored employee who would just love to leave their desk and look at the windows. People never look at anything, and you can bet your life someone is working beneath your window day in, day out, and hasn't noticed it. If I forget, keep reminding me until I do it. It would be a fun job to go and photograph it. I need to do a winter photo of Bradford Industrial Museum, anyway - you can't see the jolly thing for trees in summer.--Storye book (talk) 21:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I rang Bradford City Hall, and they had not heard of any such memorial window. Someone kindly investigated for me, and they rang back today and said that it's a mistake, and there is no architectural feature such as a memorial window dedicated to this lady. There is a movable installation within the building, incorporating a display dedicated to her and to other local heroes. I'm told that this is in a public place and that I can visit it. I shall photograph that for you when I can - hopefully during the next couple of weeks - but I'm sorry there is no window to photograph. I guess that there is a slight possibility that there may be a memorial window in a church somewhere, and that could explain the error, but I don't know how to investigate that.--Storye book (talk) 11:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I've just heard that I may be able to visit the City Hall tomorrow. I'll see what I can do.--Storye book (talk) 12:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Just letting you know that because Coronation Street is filming in the building for the next two weeks, it will not be permissible for me to get into the building to see the display which includes B.J. Harrison. The staff have tried to fix it for me today, but cannot. I'll try to do it in two or three weeks' time, though. If I appear to be delaying or forgetting, please kindly give me a reminder. Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 10:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Churches in Friesland

I’am pretty sure they all are but the website is kinda slow and searching seems difficult somehow on my pc. So I won’t be adding the numbers.(at least for now). Pindanl (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tudeley and treacle

Hi there.

The problem with the treacle mine entry is that although it is amusing it does not add much to the general content of the page.

If you were to expand the Tudeley article to include a lot more information about the place, and then add your (quite amusing) treacle mine ref for good measure I would have no problem.

But when the article is just 120-odd words in length, to devote 10% of them to treacle mines seems disproportionate to me.

Best wishes

TT20 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tishtosh20 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hamilton Road Cemetery

Hiya,

No, I didn't..what a time to be on holiday and not see the 'frickin' article on BBC! Thankfully they've posted the piece on the web. As far as I know, they think, with some justification, that it's a D017, but there doesn't appear to be a definite identification of it being THE D017 in my article, although the circumstantial evidence seems strong. Being local, I'm hoping to talk to the guys featured and see if I can find out some specifics. I'll pass on what I can but as this would constitute original research, I guess I can only point interested readers to other external content like the BBC Kent page :-( Bummer! Kbaughan1 (talk) 22:19, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of museums in Kent

Hi, thank you for adding to the list, but I am working on it as well and we seem to be overlapping. Please leave the type "mill" for all grinding mills, including windmills and watermills, as this is the category name for Category:Mill museums in England. The type of mill can be noted in the summary. Also, Down House is located Downe in what is now the London Borough of Bromley and is not considered to be in Kent. I will continue to update the museum listings with complete information. Jllm06 (talk) 20:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hobart 2020 Bid

So please allow me to clear something up. It is ok for other users to edit pages with no knowledge at all of the material that is posted on the page, yet when somebody with the knowledge edits it with relevant sources to back the information up, it gets deleted and that is ok with that user then being threatened? The information on the 2020 Summer Olympics page was vandalised by somebody claiming it to be an April Fools joke then it was removed completely due to this (check the edits) and then it is falsely claimed by another user to be illegitame and 'not taken seriously' despite the obvious references to it being a legitimate bid? Brisbane has no intent to bid for the 2020 Olympics yet it remains on the page, so tell me, where is the fairness in this involved?

NYC 55david (talk) 12:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you get your facts right NYC 55david! I never said it was an April Fools joke nor did I vandalise the article, I also have given you a very good reason in the edit summary why it shouldn't be added and I have better things to do then reverting self promotional crap. Bidgee (talk) 14:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted also to Australia and Tasmania project talk pages)

Ahah legitimacy - a few people in Tasmania are capable of creating a semblance of legitimacy by having a web page presence, facebook page and a few newspaper articles on an item - I would suggest information is never particularly straight forward - the actual proposal was in fact an april fools joke (the state of Tasmania has less than 500.000 population - the prospect of an isolated state on the outer side of the planet being capable of attracting either the money, facility or infrastructure for such a bid is close to absurd) - to give credence to the gullible - facebook, and newspaper cites alone may look 'good' and 'valid' - but ahh, I used to live in a part of Tasmania that had the marvellous total population of less then 5,000 people at any one time in the last 50 years.

The interesting thing is it did start out as a joke - see http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/olympic_bids/future_bids_2016/1216135135.html - and like chinese whispers and good media stories that run beyond the original intent and take on a life of their own - there are people who move it up a rung to try to keep the story going - I would suggest that any inclusion of such an item needs to be qualified specifically as to what it started out as - and that the probability of anyone in Australia being prepared to support the bid as being next not nothing and not even something a betting person could even start to make odds on - Tasmanians cannot even vote on a clear majority government Tasmanian state election, 2010 due to the Hare-Clark voting system, I suspect they will be preoccupied with many other things other than finding the finance for Olympic bids in the near future Satu Suro 13:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Railways

Earlier discussions are archived here

Hawkhurst branch

I think it's definitely possible. I've got enough material to produce a well-referenced article, the only question mark is over images. I'll draw up a wishlist on the article's talk page. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar, I've still got some refs to add in from Hart and also check if there are any interesting magazine articles which could be used. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on the very thorough job you've done cleaning up the text. I've had a look for the Railway Modeller articles and came across this useful page [10]. Do we need to include track plans in the article given that there's already a pretty comprehensive routemap? I'll try and get hold of a copy of the Railway Magazine article. Lamberhurst (talk) 08:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the ref requested. The track plans look a lot better than I had imagined possible using the RDTs, but I wonder if it's not overloading the article too much to go into any more detail about the stations? Lamberhurst (talk) 22:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The system of referencing was introduced to me by User:Redrose64 and I've asked him to look into your question. He may also be able to help us get the article into FA shape which I think is definitely achievable before June 2011. By the way, I'm not sure if you noticed but the original Cranbrook and Paddock Wood Railway article seems to have been started by the curator of the Col. Stephens museum. I think I might drop him a line to see if he has any out-of-copyright material that we might use here. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Route map

Please look at this: User:Sameboat/x4. I use the {{bs5-sc}} ({{BS5-startCollapsible}}) to hide the features except for stations and branchings. Because using the in-map collapsible section will increase 1 more row for the route map, it is justifiable if there're enough materials to be hidden rather than just 1 single section like the siding. Alternatively you may create 2 maps, 1 simplified for including the stations and branching, another 1 for detailed characteristic of the line. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cudworth locos

I'm trying to get something together at Talk:Hawkhurst Branch Line regarding your recent edits where loco classes are mentioned. Basically: the Cudworth 118 class 2-4-0 and the SER E class 2-4-0 are one and the same. Unfortunately it takes some WP:OR using Bradley's work on SER locos (2nd ed, at least) to work it out, but: on p.15 we have "E - Cudworth standard 2-4-0s" and by eliminating all non-Cudworth locos, the small (ie non-standard) classes and all non-2-4-0 locos, all that is left is the 118 class (pp. 101-112). --Redrose64 (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

following sentence moved from User talk:Redrose64 (Redrose64 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

If you read the James Cudworth article, you'll see that the locos were rebuilt. Is it possible that the E1 class were the rebuilds of the 118 class? Mjroots (talk) 18:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

end of moved section. (I dislike disjoint conversations, and this page is on my watchlist)

I have problems there. I am assuming that the section you mean is the paragraph beginning "By 1855, Cudworth started to introduce more conventional steam locomotives", since that is the only one to mention (a) the 118 class and (b) the word "rebuilt". First, the only reference given for that paragraph is "Nock, O. S. (1961). "VI". The South Eastern and Chatham Railway. London: Ian Allen. pp. p70-79. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help)" which is somewhat vague. I happen to have a copy (albeit the 1971 paperback reprint), and looking through those ten pages for the classes described, a better citation would be "Nock, O.S. (1971) [1961]. "VI: Early Locomotives and Trains". The South Eastern and Chatham Railway. Shepperton: Ian Allan. pp. 71–72. ISBN 0 7110 0268 1.". Second, the only mention of the 118 Class is in the sentence "Fifty three 0-6-0 goods engines were constructed at Ashford Works between 1855 and 1876, the 118 class". This, and the two sentences which follow, are backed up (Nock pp. 71-72) except that Nock does not mention "118 Class". Checking elsewhere in the chapter, he doesn't mention "118 Class" at all. According to Bradley (Bradley, D.L. (1985) [1963]. The Locomotive History of the South Eastern Railway (2nd ed.). London: RCTS. p. 91. ISBN 0 901115 48 7. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)) the 53 goods engines were known as the "Standard Goods", and no. 118 is not listed in the class summary (Bradley p. 98). Turning now to the sentence "In 1857, Cudworth introduced a class of 2-4-0s" and the three which follow it; these are all backed up (Nock p. 72), but it is these engines which Bradley describes both as the "118 Class" (Bradley pp. 101,103) and also as the "standard 2-4-0s" (Bradley p. 103) except that he separates off the first six from E.B. Wilson as a distinct class (Bradley pp. 99-100), giving 68 from Ashford and 42 from contractors - and no. 118 is one of the Ashford engines. Now, to the letter or letter/digit class codes. These are listed as introduced by Stirling in September 1879 (Bradley p. 15), where we find the "Standard Goods" as the I class, the E.B. Wilson 2-4-0s as the D class, and the Cudworth standard 2-4-0s as the E class. Bradley rarely uses these class codes in his text, until Stirling's own classes are mentioned, and does not do so at all for the three classes in question. Nock similarly ignores these codes until dealing with Stirling's classes. I have never come across E1 used to describe anything in that part of the world other than Maunsell's 1919-20 rebuilds of the Wainwright E class 4-4-0. Most of the 118 class were indeed rebuilt, some twice (Bradley pp. 105-106), but the use of the suffix "1" to a Stirling class letter does not seem to come up until the SECR period (B1 rebuilt from B by Wainwright, F1 from F, etc.). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I see where I've gone wrong (I think). the 59 and 118 class were both 2-4-0s. I don't have access to Bradley so perhaps you can expand the article a bit. What class were the 0-4-4s that Cudworth introduced? Mjroots (talk) 06:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few tweaks to the James Cudworth article. Mjroots (talk) 06:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, more confusion. The 59 class were the three 0-6-0s built at Ashford in 1879, to Mansell's design although incorporating features of Cudworth's standard goods; Stirling allotted them N class (the standard goods were I class). Principal diffs included the driving wheels (5'0" instead of 4'10") and cylinders (17"x24" instead of 16"x24"). (Bradley pp. 156-157)

There were several designs of 2-4-0 in the Cudworth period, and Bradley divides them into seven classes, six being small in number.

The 0-4-4Ts on the SER fell neatly into three classes:

the Cudworth "235 class" (J class) well tanks, 7 locos built 1866 by Brassey & Co; (Bradley pp. 122-123)
the Mansell "Gunboats" (M class) side tanks, 9 built Ashford 1877-8; (Bradley pp. 134-136)
the Stirling Q class side tanks, 118 built (48 by Ashford; 60 by Neilson, Reid; 10 by Sharp, Stewart) 1881-1897 (Bradley pp. 160-171). Rebuilds of these with H class boilers by Wainwright or Maunsell were Q1 class.

Re the Cudworth article: puzzled by your title for chapter VI - it's called "Early Locomotives and Trains" in mine, in which it's chapter X that is called "South Eastern & Chatham" (and not "The South East and Chatham Railway" as you put); removal of the mention of the 118 class is good; the table is a start: I'll see what can be added directly, rather than putting more notes here. Bear in mind that my Bradley page numbers will be (as they are above) those of the second edition, which is much expanded from the first.

It's a good idea to get yourself a copy. Looking around second-hand railway book sellers, the first edition is far easier to obtain - I think because the second is always snapped up by those who already have a first, who then dispose of the shorter first ed. Try Geoff Gamble Books in Crawley. I've picked up some real good stuff from them. They'll be at Leatherhead model railway show, 26-27 February 2010. Make sure you ask for "The Locomotive History of the South Eastern Railway, second edition, by D.L. Bradley", because he wrote eleven books covering the SR's locos - Bruce Smetham (who took over Geoff Gamble Books after the death of the founder) will know exactly what you mean, given that sentence. Altogether, Bradley's books in this series were: one each for the SER, LCDR, SECR (1960-1963); two for the LSWR (1965-7); three for the LBSCR (1969-74); two for the SR post grouping classes (1975-6); and one for the Isle of Wight (1982). The SER, LCDR & SECR books all went to a second edition in 1979-1985 (see LCDR R1 class#References for details), so these are far commoner than the others. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the chapter title in the ref. Must've still be half-asleep when I did that! Mjroots (talk) 16:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Cudworth's unusual middle name "I'Anson". I've been poking around and have found this website, where we find that it seems to have variant spellings including "Ianson"; see this page. In the same site I have found this page - it doesn't mention our James Cudworth; but note the word "Ashford" in the heading (which suggests a family connection to that town), and much later on, the paragraph beginning "Mary, the sole surviving daughter of William and Mary Ianson, married William Cudworth, grocer and druggist, of Darlington". It's both the right town and the right religion; so do you have anything that gives the names of James I'Anson Cudworth's parents? Would they be William Cudworth and Mary I'Anson by any chance? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo! See James Cudworth#Early life. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your text "2-4-0s for the Hastings Line. These engines were known as the 59 class.[8]"; all that ref. 8 says is "Woodlands class Designed by Alfred Kitching in 1848 ... Nos. 58 Woodlands, 59 Hallgarth ... John Kitching claimed that the design was copied by James Cudworth for the 59 class used on SER Hastings trains.". Looking at Bradley p. 88 we have the "Hastings" class, which it says 'appear to have been influenced by the 1848 "Woodland" class long-boiler 2-4-0s of the Stockton & Darlington Railway' Nowhere in Bradley is "59 class" mentioned in connection with these engines, whose numbers were 157-170.

Considering other possible SER locos numbered 59:

Watkin built an 0-6-0 no. 59 in 1879, which was of his "59 class".
Right back at the dawn of SER history, there was no no. 59 until 1844. Some 2-2-2s were built by Sharp, Roberts in 1841 for the London & Brighton Railway, one of which was L&B no. 20. On formation of the Brighton, Croydon & Dover Joint Committee in 1844, this loco was renumbered 59; on the dissolution of the joint committee a year later, it passed to the SER but retained its number. (Bradley pp. 35, 37, 39)

Now, we have "No. 59 which had been rebuilt as a 2-4-0 in 1855" (Bradley p. 50) and we also find that several Sharps 2-2-2s, including no. 59, had been rebuilt as 2-4-0s by Cudworth at around the same time (Bradley pp. 38-39); but none of these rebuilds are described as "59 class". No. 59 itself was withdrawn in 1879, which leaves no space in between the old L&B engine and the Watkin 0-6-0 in which to put a Cudworth 2-4-0 - unless the 1855 rebuild be the one; but I don't think that a rebuild could produce a copy of an existing design on another railway. However, a new design, such as the "Hastings" class, could well be a copy. I think that the steamindex page has mixed its sources. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've got Bradley, so if you think the 59 class is wrong I'll not object to it being changed. The table coud probably do with some wikilinks once all the classes have been sorted out. Mjroots (talk) 14:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nom

Don't know if you've noticed, but I left a comment at Template talk:Did you know#James Cudworth, because I expanded that part of James Cudworth which is directly related to the DYK sentence. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've not finished the table of loco classes - at least as far as the section "Cudworth rebuilds of pre-1845 locomotives" is concerned. However, the section "Locomotives built new to Cudworth's order" has all the rows which it should have. I've removed the "under construction" tag, also added notability to the lede, items to the infobox, a succession box at the bottom (see below re Watkin) and reset the paragraph on the coal burning firebox. Here's a composite diff of this morning's work. nb Watkin's name pops up as a redlink in several articles, with almost no consistency - I have seen Alfred Mellor Watkin, Alfred Meller Watkin, Alfred M. Watkin, Alfred Watkin, A.M. Watkin. One of these redirects to Edward Watkin. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Cudworth is now at Template:Did you know/Queue#Prep area 2 .5Bedit.5D. Any idea of typical timescales by which time any tweaks to the article must be completed? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have the 1971 reprint, which has a SBN (on the page opposite the contents page). Converting a SBN to an ISBN is dead simple - just stick a "0" at the start. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dyk hook suggestion

Hi, I am just wondering if you noticed the discussion regarding your dyk hook here. You may want to comment. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 01:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of James Cudworth

Hello! Your submission of James Cudworth at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 09:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is Kings Ferry North Halt the same as Swale North Halt?

You asked this question on my talk page on 18 Nov 2009, and I replied there using info from the only books I have, which suggested that the answer is no. However, User Lamberhurst might have better information in his copy of Colonel Cobbs Atlas.

More recently you stated this again on the talk page for Closed stations Kent, and so far no-one has replied there.

What source of information suggests to you that Kings Ferry North Halt the same as Swale North Halt?

Efficacy (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add the information that I have; I shall do so at Template talk:Closed stations Kent. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on the template's talk page. Mjroots (talk) 06:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability (railway incidents)

Just a note to say that whilst I'm battering the guideline, and indeed the idea of the guideline, I'm absolutely not having a go at you, and accept fully that your intentions are the best. Please don't be discouraged. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milk Tanks

Milk tanks are a peculiar case. They fall into that grey area of rolling stock categorisation which is neither passenger nor freight, and is described in many books as "non-passenger carrying coaching stock" or NPCCS, being stock which doesn't carry passengers, yet is permitted (by reason of wheelbase, brakes, etc.) to run in passenger trains. On annual returns made by railway companies to the Board of Trade, milk tanks were included under the heading "open carriage trucks". This, I believe, stems from around 1927, when the railways started to switch from churns to tanks for the carriage of milk. Despite them being essentially inseparable, for many years (right down to the end of milk transport by rail in the early 1980s I think) the rail chassis was owned by the railway, and the tank itself by the dairy. Thus, since the railway was not responsible for the tank, it saw no reason for a special classification - so they remained under the "open carriage truck" heading. Details of SR no. 4430 (Diagram 3157, HOO no. 768, Lancing September 1933), which carried a UD tank, may be found in

Gould, David (1992). "Chapter Nine: Milk Tanks". Southern Railway Passenger Vans. Headington: The Oakwood Press. pp. 99, 105, 114, 115. ISBN 0 85361 428 8. X50.

which contains the interesting text

No. 4430 was obtained by the Bluebell railway in August 1981 following its withdrawal in 1980. The actual tank was donated by St. Ivel, but the underframe, being BR property, had to be bought by the Bluebell!

So, I don't really agree with your recent changes. Sorry. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wagons may only run in passenger trains if they meet certain specifications. Most apparent "wagons" used in passenger trains were actually NPCCS, such as fish vans, fresh meat vans and parcels vans - the common factor being that the items that they carried were penalised by delays, either because they were perishable, or because there was a promised delivery time. This meant that they needed to be conveyed as quickly as possible, so virtually all suitable vehicles were built to passenger train requirements. Since milk tanks carried perishable goods, they are NPCCS and not freight stock. Petrol tanks on the other hand, carried materials which were non-perishable, did not attract a penalty if delayed; and because of the inherent dangers, were expressly forbidden from being formed in passenger trains. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That looks better, thanks --Redrose64 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invicta

Yes, there are plans but I can't find a reference for the Transport Trust gifting the locomotive to Whitstable museum (which makes no sense, as it would be to Canterbury City Council, owners of the museum).

But for the moving to Whitstable museum, the following reference (just a few days old). Whitstable Gazette, Page 4, March 25:

City council spokesman Steve James said: "Invicta is at Museum of Canterbury and it is council policy for it to go to Whitstable Museum when space is made available as part of the development."

Nothing to show ownership has been transferred from the Transport Trust, though.

Thanks GTD 15:34, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Signal Icons

You posted about some railway image requests, so I'm here to post. I'm not exactly sure from your description if this is correct, so please tell me where it can be improved:

Equally, when you say you want it to be rotated 180 degrees, does that mean you want to have the signal upside down on the opposite side, or simply reflected, so that it is still facing upwards, but inwards, on the other side?

NikNaks93 (talk) 10:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's that? I've made it look a little more 3D, as well. NikNaks93 (talk) 11:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now that I know what it's being used for, I suggest a change in tack. It is very difficult to render a thin shape like the signal on such a small scale, so instead, it may make more sense to simply use the arm on the appropriate size. I have mocked up what this would look like on the other filespace you set aside in your request (I know it's on the wrong side, but I'm doing it for comparison), and I think it works quite well. However, you're the expert here, so if you feel it will create confusion, I'm happy to hear other suggestions.

I don't want to clog up your talk page with more images, so I've just edited the example diagram on my talk page. You can see the signal variation above the new alternative arm-only one. NikNaks93 (talk) 13:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further to that, I've put up another alternative with a much fatter signal. NikNaks93 (talk) 13:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm still concerned with how difficult it is to tell what it is on such a small scale, and something more stylised would be best, to fit with the existing plans. However, if you feel it's alright, we'll move on. I've replaced the third alternative file with the new one. NikNaks93 (talk) 14:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Icon request 0417

Since I received your msg just before I go to sleep. I give you 1 more option, use the t (tunneled) set (tCONTl), (tSTR) to represent the 3rd gauge length. This can help the color-blind reader to distinguish different gauges in the map. If you still think the green CONT set is irreplaceable, let me know which color you exactly need or offer the icons of that same color. I will create them tomorrow. You're welcome. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have uploaded the rest of the green CONT set

(CONTf green). Most of the other icons of set green were originally created / altered by Russian users for Russian metro maps. It's quite complete so you have the thickened choice for your map. commons:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set green. But there's one more concern. Your map includes the info of milage but not applying them in the 4th text column, though I can see that you don't prefer it to be right-aligned. There's a simple trick to line them left-aligned on the right hand side tidily like in the table. See Wikipedia_talk:RDT#Just another trick for the BS row templates (no new parameter involved). Happy editing. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rivers

Earlier discussions are archived here

River Len

Mike I feel quite pleased with myself! I had found the relatively new Geobox|rivers at River Trent and investigated. You will now see the result at this article (I took an easy one first!). There may well be other information - I couldn't work out the coordinates, and in any case a river covers more than one; couldn't find the exact length; and dunno if there is anywhere to be able to get flow rates etc. You may well be able to add more tributaries - I took the ones you had alraedy mentioned under the mills. None of the blanks come out until you give some information. I had also discovered the exact location of the source - a historical document on the Medway; I'm sure you also know more about its course, although perhaps that isn't too important. Peter Peter Shearan (talk) 21:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mill symbols

As you see I have put two new symbols into your sandbox article. Just a quick fix. Using mills in this way is quite an extension. Come September we need to define what symbols we need- mills with weirs for example, millponds goits. I have been visiting the Dark Peak and realise how much more important water engineering was in the 1780s and the growth of the Cotton Industry. Still I am taking a break now. ClemRutter (talk) 08:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been talking with guys at WP:RIVERS and trying to work out what icon system to recommend. In a nutshell, the cyan worms are out, rivers are dark blue unless you need to differentiate- then non-navigable are light blue and navigable are darkblue. but I am still working on it. You have source at the top. River Len, Kent seems to be correct. See also Manchester Ship Canal for an upside down example. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers#Route diagrams gives the discussion.--ClemRutter (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cadeau

fr:Fichier:LeteaMill.jpg is heel mooi! --ClemRutter (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Medway diagram

This takes a little thought. I like diagrams- very useful for showing mill locations- but there is a convention on canals that navigable should be darkblue and non navigable light blue. The tails as steams meet the river seem clunky. I have been concerned about the representation of reservoirs for some time- is a reservoir navigable or not- how do you show the dam bypass channel. In the simple case: a truncated salami would do- but they often are constructed at the confluence of several rivers. A lot of icons need some thought- and that will take a little time- I will put it on the list. (Some mills are on the wrong bank but that is minor). --ClemRutter (talk) 11:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have put in far too many hours playing with the diagram on my talk page. Please look over- and see if there is anything to add- you will need to proof read the position of the mills relative to the new locks, and the addition of the Beult and the two mouths of the Teise. I have added some new icons to Template:Waterways legend particularly putting curved dams on reservoirs. --ClemRutter (talk) 19:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be positive: it is getting there. A few of your changes I don"t like. A river is a hydrographical item, as well as cultural one. The first uncollapsed diagram needs to stand in its own right, and give the reader basic infomation about its course. The collapsed bits need to show the twidddly bits, that the Teise at Yalding has bifurcated, and where mills were situated. When the course is a navigation we need info on the locks. Background colour needs to show whether the river is tidal, a navigation, or non-navigable. The section names are taken from the NRA, and are used by the waterways community- I don't think Lower Mid Upper is really informative. The whole diagram (uncollapsed) needs to be complete and informative in itself. I think that we should do another round of rollbacks and improvement then wrap it in a template and ask the WP:RIVERS for comment on any points where policy decisions need to be made. I would like to use it as a model to be attached to their policy page. I then want to code up the River Etherow, Irk, Irwell, Medlock, Goyt can't you just smell the cotton. --ClemRutter (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, width is critical when using collapsable box- expand all the section to see it isn't broken by the change. Titles a lot better- I took one look and thought- I knew I was about to to do that-- but I can't remember having done it. These wretched dock icons look awful- I am going to redo them- I cant see why a narrow dock should be five times wider than the river. I am more concerned about the length if the diagram, then allowing the diagram to be included in Kent pages that make a mention to the Medway. Then into Infoboxes.I am uploading images along the commons:Portland Basin- Ashton Canal at the moment.--ClemRutter (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know this one? Template:Medway Navigation--ClemRutter (talk) 13:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

River Medway

Legend

				00.0	Source TQ 334 359
					51°06′25″N 0°05′37″W / 51.10694°N 0.09361°W / 51.10694; -0.09361
				00.0	Upper Reaches
					B2028
					Fen Place Mill
					B2110
					Bluebell Railway

					West Hoathly Stream

					Weir Wood Reservoir
					Mill Place Foundry
					East Grinstead Stream

					Brambletye Mill
					A22
					Three Bridges to
					Tunbridge Wells Central Line
					Tablehurst Mill
					Parrock Forge
					Hartfield Iron Mill
					B2026
					Hartfield Stream


					Warren Brook

					Waterdown Forest Stream

					Groombridge Stream

					Ashurst Mill
					A264
					Oxted Line
					Kent Water

					Ashurst Furnace

					Chafford Mills
					B2188
					Poundbridge Stream

					Barden Mill Stream

					Pound Mill
				00.0	River Eden to Leigh
					River Eden

					B2176
					Ensfield Mill
					Ensfield Road
					Limit of navigation
					Redhill to Tonbridge Line
					A21

					Ramhurst Mill
					Powder Mills

				00.0	Leigh to Yalding
					South Eastern Main Line


					Tonbridge
					Tonbridge High Street B2260
				28	Town Lock

					Town Mill
					Cannon Lane A26


					Southborough Bourne

				25.6	Eldridge Lock
				24	Porters Lock
					Hartlake Road
				22	East Lock
					Tudeley Brook

					Pen Stream

				20.8	Oak Weir Lock
					River Bourne


					Sluice Weir Lock
					Branbridges Mill
					Branbridges

					A228
					Medway Valley Line
				00.0	Yalding to Allington Lock
					Site of Stoneham Lock
					River Teise
					Greater Teise
					Sluice
					Twyford Bridge B2162
					Lesser Teise
					River Beult
					Hampstead Mill
					Hamptons Bridge B2162
				15.3	Hampstead Lock
					Breden's Boatyard
					Hampstead Marina
					Hampstead Lane Canal
					Wateringbury Stream

					Wateringbury Bridge
					West Farleigh Stream

				10.4	Teston Lock
					Teston Bridge B2163
					Barming Bridge
					East Farleigh Bridge
				7.5	Farleigh Lock
					Line to Tovil Goods station
					Loose Stream

					River Len

					A20
					A20
					Maidstone
					Maidstone East Line
					Boxley Stream

					Allington Castle
				00.0	Allington Lock to Rochester
					Allington Lock
					M20
					Cossington Stream

					Aylesford Bridge
					East Malling Stream

					Friars Mill
					Addington Brook

					Holborough Brook

					Borstal Mill
					Cuxton Mill
					High Speed 1
					M2
					Priory Mill
					Strood Tide Mill
					Rochester
					Rochester Bridge A2
					Chatham Main Line
					Strood, Thames and Medway Canal
					Chatham
					Chatham Tide Mill
					Chatham Dockyard
					Medway Tunnel A289
					Gillingham
					The Swale
					Isle of Sheppey
					Thames Estuary TQ 903 758

Well it is certainly ready to be wrapped in a template- so I have. We can do further editing there {{River Medway map}}. I did do one change as the Tidal estuary is downstream from Rochester.

True. There is a limit to the sort of ship you can drive under Rochester Bridge. I think the commissioner of HM Dockyard would agree with me. The London Stone is at Upnor, which is/was the upstream limit of the Port of London- but Rochester is miles from the Swale or Thames. This wrretched river never does things simply!--ClemRutter (talk) 08:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rivers

I have been putting a bit of input into Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers‎; that may interest you. Later tonight I will be posting some of the changes. --ClemRutter (talk) 17:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:River Waveney map

Hi. I notice you have updated the River Waveney map, but was a little surprised to see that it now runs from south to north. One of the problems of the transposition is that several of the adjoining rivers are now shown on the wrong side. Oulton Broad should be on the other side, as should the River Yare, and the Haddiscoe cut is no longer clearly labelled. I was going to try to sort it out but am a bit short of time at the moment. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am back from holiday now, and have moved Oulton Broad, Haddiscoe Cut and the River Bure back to where they should be, corrected the direction of the locks, and produced a windmill symbol for the windmills. However, I have no sources for which side of the river the windmills should be on, and as the river and Haddiscoe Cut have now been transposed, wondered if you could just check them. Thanks. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ships

Earlier discussions are archived here

WWII merchant navy gallantry awards

Since you're perhaps the most active editor on Merchant Navy vessels that served in the Second World War, I thought you might be interested to know that Series T 335 in the catalogue of The National Archives can now be searched by name of ship and/or name of recipient, see http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/search.asp and simply enter the ship name in the "Word or phrase" field, and T 335 in the "Department or Series code field". If there are any hits, the file description will also tell you in which London Gazette the announcement of the award was made. David Underdown (talk) 09:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yours is the name I see coming up regularly at DYK, and asking questions at WT:MARITIME, so if anyone is working on the others, they're not as visible. Simply putting in Empire returns 64 hits, each individual list may then refer to more than one ship of course. David Underdown (talk) 10:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question on move discussion

Can you take a look again at Talk:MS Caribbean Princess#Requested move? I'm still not seeing where in WP:NC-SHIPS supports using the prefix. The way I read it "A ship not known by a prefix should appear under its name only, if that is unambiguous". As the ship builder website, the cruise line website, and all but one ref in the article all seem to omit the prefix - it seems that this does fall into the category of a ship not known by its prefix. If you're using a different line in that guideline, can you help point it out, because I may be overlooking it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:20, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moscow University

Autochthony writes - I hope this is a relevant part of your talk page; I was one of those made eredundant in 2008 by Novoship UK. I have worked as a Company Security Officer since the ISPS Code came in - having had to deal with another two security events whilst at Novoship [UK], but fortunately none in my present job. Re citadel - it's standard advice - see best management practice - http://www.marisec.org/piracy-gulf-of-aden-indian-ocean-industry-best-management-practice see 4(j). 1945z 6 May 2010.

P.S. cheers - and I note your interest in Mr Allingham. 81.156.52.159 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sport

Earlier discussions are archived here

Re: 2010 F1 season

Don't fret man, I'm sure we've all made errors like that at some point during our Wiki lives. We learn and learn every day. :) Regards. Cs-wolves (talk) 15:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Hamilton

It'll probably help that the 115.134.x.x range is out of the way; though I'm sure that's not the only IP range in Malaysia! Black Kite (t) (c) 09:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My editing

Earlier discussions are archived here

Miramar

You wrote to me some time ago because of broken links. Have you seen the note on start page that the website won't be public available anymore? Can you add a note to {{Cite Miramar}}? Merl issimo 02:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Om nom nom...

Tbsdy lives has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

Debkafile on RSN

Can you revisit WP:RSN and say which article Debka was being considered for? The response was a lot faster than I'd like to see on RSN, and I think this deserves a closer look. Squidfryerchef (talk) 00:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar for MV Willesden (1944)

I had at first been impressed by the MV Willesden (1944) article, but when I saw just HOW MUCH you contribute, especially to topics of interest in the UK, I thought "Tireless Contributor" seemed pretty appropriate. --SmokingNewton (talk) 07:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA reviews

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Pyrotec's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Pyrotec (talk) 11:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This might be the most organised talk page I've ever seen. Just a note to let you know that I've opened the second GA review on BOAC Flight 712. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:41, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Oak GA

Thanks for sponsoring the Irish Oak to GA. Much appreciated. Now I return to Irish Mercantile Marine during World War II. regards - ClemMcGann (talk) 02:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the appreciation! Only got back today and have to run! Has it been nominated for DYK? Cheers! Shir-El too 12:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Twit

I have ignored your request to identify the twit, what a joke, are you serious? Off2riorob (talk) 21:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ITN

Thanks!XavierGreen (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

answered you on my dutch talk page (with delay). Akoopal (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Re: Other users

Earlier discussions are archived here

Avoiding speedy deletions and AfDs

Usually those articles get expanded by other people too, by starting the article in the mainspace they get a chance to work on it too and add info that I don't have. That happened for example here: March 881. Dr. Loosmark 18:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, however not always I have the possibilities to better develop the articles myself. But lets be clear about one thing, there was no reason to CSD those articles. Dr. Loosmark 19:06, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Koavf

Please take note of this discussion. Radiopathy •talk• 02:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here (permalink) I believe that Radiopathy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is hounding me and has involved your talk page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks For looking into this. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted the admins involved in lifting the sanction to be aware of issues like this; he still edit wars, insists that he's universally correct, then uses terms like "uncivil" and "wikihound" when someone catches him. Radiopathy •talk• 14:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Removal of sections from talk:2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash

Yeah, looks pretty solid to me. Didn't seem to have much to do with the article, best not to let a talk page like that get cluttered with rubbish. J Milburn (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Brigadier Jamesbreadth"

You'll remember "Brigadier Jamesbreadth", whom we discussed on my Talk page. He seems to be stalking me now; an article I edited a short while ago, Esomeprazole has had references to Jamesbreadth added which I reverted. The edit comment was sane and sensible, if untrue: "Additional brand names". Do you have any suggestions on my best course of action? For the time being it appears that anything I edit will target stupidity. Maybe I should stop editing for a while. Pol098 (talk) 12:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pol, you can stop editing for awhile if you wish, but I'm concerned that this will have no effect on Jamesbreadthian additions to articles in general. 216.26.209.47 (talk) 12:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brigadier Jamesbreadth, 216.211.93.108, is I think back as 216.211.119.194.
Hugh MacColl. Comparison. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 18:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:UAA

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. I agree; I see no evidence of malicious intent; the user in question likely saw that User:Knowledgeseeker was taken (that was my original user name), and so changed the spelling. The issue is that there could be potential confusion between us, though if the user wishes to continue with the name, I have no objections. I am quite impressed with Newyorkbrad's handling of this matter. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that could be useful, though I don't think I'd like the way it would look. I appreciate the tip, though. — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Amon Koth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Amon Koth (talk) 16:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Mjroots. You have new messages at Amon Koth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Amon Koth (talk) 17:20, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dave1185

My comments on Dave's page regarding redirecting his unprotected page to an admin's page was sarcasm. Thanks for proving my point. - BilCat (talk) 22:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous

Earlier discussions are archived here

Flag of the Isle of Man

Ok, thanks. I wrote the right version and i corrected the mistake. Sorry for that error. Thanks again. Bye--Perkeleperkele (talk) 18:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey civil ensign

I noticed that someone had created an image: File:Proposed Civil Ensign of Jersey.svg. Man vyi (talk) 05:09, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou

I suppose this fits under "misc." I just wanted to say thanks for supporting my RfA. It's always nice to see a familiar sig in the support section, but I'm humbled that you think I'm ready. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ITN

Just FYI, Wikipedia talk:In the news/Candidates redirects to WT:ITN and has done since last September. It's up to you, but that might be a better venue than AN since you'll be more likely to attract admins who are involved in ITN. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:36, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New messages

Lib Dems election wins

re your comment on my talk page. No i believe they only did win one seat, i'll double check the meridien tonight program again. hayyzzz96 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hayyzzz96 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flight 771

Good working with you today! I think we (and the other contributors) did a pretty darn good job on this one... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, it'll be interesting to know if it was an out-of-fuel/faulty indicator combination or something else. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:10, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of interest, is there any mileage in (once the sex is determined) this article being nominated at DYK for a "sole survivor" style hook? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I had a quick look for that rule, couldn't see it, but thanks for clarifying it for me. And yes, I agree that an ITN is much more satisfying than a DYK. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind welcome! Glad I could help. :) Leime (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]