User talk:EdJogg

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

I will reply here to messages left on this page. If I leave a message on your talk page, I will expect a reply there.

GA approval for Holt Manufacturing Company[edit]

Editors Barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
Thanks for the big assist with getting Holt Manufacturing Company ready for GA review. It passed on the first attempt.-- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 05:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. You are most kind. It was a fair bit of work but clearly worth it in the end. -- EdJogg (talk) 12:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Somerset Space Walk[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Need to check this again, as it's presumably still 1st October in some parts of the world, but currently it's at 6500 views! I think that can be called a 'result'! -- EdJogg (talk) 00:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
6504 to be precise. Just re-checked. And no-one's looked at it since :o( -- EdJogg (talk) 07:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Clearly a glitch with the monitoring tool. Page is picking up views daily. Have added to DYKSTATS, as it qualifies. EdJogg (talk) 09:30, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help[edit]

Canal.at.bathampton.arp.jpg Thanks
Thank you for your help with the review of the Kennet and Avon Canal at FAC, which has just been promoted. — Rod talk 14:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

GWR 6800 Class 6880 Betton Grange[edit]

Hi, I hope that this finds you well! Could I ask a favour, that you run your excellent editting eye over the new article for GWR 6800 Class 6880 Betton Grange for me? Thank You! Rgds, --Trident13 Ian (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ian. Sorry for the delayed response. I have been busy off-wiki over the past few weeks (I am still!) and decided to take a wiki-break and re-start my WP editing from 1st Nov.
I've had a read through your article and will try to have a more detailed look soon.
EdJogg (talk) 14:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ghost in Burpham, Surrey?[edit]

Hi, I invite you to make your thoughts known on best place to put the ghost: Talk:Burpham,_Surrey

Seddon-Atkinson[edit]

I'll have to dig through the references I do have for the Atkinson stuff, probably after I've finished the Leyland Titan Article, but a lot is through memory, and some of it comes from out of print publications I can't currently find to purchase. If you look at the Seddon Pennine RU article there is in there a history of Seddon Diesel Vehicles, almost all of which comes from GG Hilditch's Another look at Buses, I think the citations are in place, feel free to copy it across. Stephen Allcroft (talk) 10:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Stephen Allcroft

Thank you.
I am currently having a bit of a sabbatical from editing. There are many things I have to deal with off-Wiki and I had to completely wean myself from WP. Hopefully I will find a way of regulating my addiction so that I can return to the fold!
(Must get round to adding a 'currently off-wiki' banner!)
EdJogg (talk) 13:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I tend to binge-edit and then go quiet for a bit, myself. But after doing the front-engined Leyland Tigers, doing the titans seemed like the next project. I'll try to get the Seddon history copied across when time permits. Stephen Allcroft (talk) 16:40, 14 June 2012 (UTC) Stephen Allcroft

This has been doneStephen Allcroft (talk) 15:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)Stephen Allcroft

Coultershaw Beam Pump[edit]

Hi - I am putting together an article on the Coultershaw Beam Pump but am slightly confused by the technology. I see that you have previously commented on Talk:Beam engine#"steam engine" so I hope you don't mind me asking you for advice. Can you explain (in simple terms) the difference between a Beam engine and a Beam pump? I had originally linked to the latter in my draft introduction, but this re-directs to Pumpjack which is a "nodding donkey" type of engine. Also, the Beam engine article starts by saying "A beam engine is a type of steam engine" whereas the one at Coultershaw is operated from a waterwheel. I am rather confused. Thanks for any help and advice. I have also posed this question to User:Andy Dingley and User:Parrot of Doom who also commented in that thread. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It's mainly a problem of terminology. To avoid you getting three answers, I suggest moving the discussion to Talk:Beam engine#Coultershaw Beam Pump. (But thank you for posting on my talk page: I get an email alert as I have currently weaned myself from chronic Wikipedia editing!) -- EdJogg (talk) 12:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Better still, go and look at User talk:Andy Dingley#Coultershaw Beam Pump for Andy's answer! -- EdJogg (talk) 13:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ed, good to see you're still around. How's the Nobel Prize coming along? I do sometimes wonder just what we could each achieve without wasting time here!
(I have an excuse - I can't leave the laser when it's cutting, so might as well fiddle here) Andy Dingley (talk) 13:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Nobel Prize? Don't think so. Currently I am 'between employment' and supposedly spending my time constructively searching.
Haven't been active on WP recently as is was spending far too much time editing and regularly checked my position in the top 2000 contributors. I enjoyed it greatly, but it was threatening to take over all my spare time. Only answer was to stop completely. Recently I have started applying edits when I see errors, but I am yet to re-start anything really productive. (And I haven't dared look at the current state of the 'Thomas' articles!) I am sure that the steam engine related articles have been well curated in my absence!
EdJogg (talk) 13:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi EdJogg - I too "retired" due to real world pressures. Just popped on to wiki to make a tiny edit, and thought "why not check the watchlist?". The first thing I saw was the creation of Thomas & Friends (franchise) and immediately thought of you! While I don't doubt the eagerness of the author to provide a central hub for all things Thomas that aren't RS/TV related, the lede "Thomas and friends was created by Rev W Wilbert. (sic)" just made me laugh. I haven't dared do anything! Anyway, regards, and best wishes - hope you are doing well!—User:MDCollins (talk) 23:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and sorry for taking so long to reply.
I still edit on WP, but at the moment only reactively, when I see something wrong during other research -- I find it far too easy to get sucked-in to a multi-page fix.
That 'franchise' page is still a mess, and the first reaction was to see if it could just be re-routed back to the original T&F page (where much of the non-TV stuff appears to have originated). But I think I just don't want to get involved! (Could be a very long job.)
Cheers -- EdJogg (talk) 17:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Inter-language Page Links[edit]

Important change while you've been away...

Other language wikipage links are now maintained centrally at WikiData (hurrah). For further information see Help:Interlanguage links.

Would be a good idea to double-check the Traction engine links as there used to be much confusion between these and portable engines. (Check your ToDo list, if you dare!)

-- EdJogg (talk) 14:10, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Meta may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • as a prefix in Greek, with variants μετ- before vowels and μεθ- "meth-" before [[aspirated vowel]]s).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorted. EdJogg (talk) 12:03, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Six-wheel drive[edit]

TB: talk:Six-wheel drive#Intermediate Differential -- How does it work?

Good to see you still around! 8-) Andy Dingley (talk) 01:16, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for that information.
I am still editing here, when I see something amiss, but I try to resist getting too absorbed! -- EdJogg (talk) 10:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:THOMAS -- Please reply[edit]

To the message I posted at WT:THOMAS. I understand you're not as active as you once were but I really need some answers to my questions and you're probably the most knowledgeable guy on the project about WP:THOMAS matters. It would be so good if we could revive this project so to speak...Acather96 (click here to contact me) 21:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Acather96:
I have replied at length on WT:THOMAS.
I may be able to provide some help, but I am more of a Wikignome at the present.
EdJogg (talk) 14:36, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Commonscat Boxes -- preventing line-breaks in long titles[edit]

Many pages have titles too long to display neatly in the commonscat box, resulting in an ugly line-break (when viewed in PC browser).

Removing the line-break with <br/> can cause unanticipated results when viewed on mobile/tablet: the Commonscat box is wider and <br/> may cause it to display unnecessarily on two lines. Instead use {{nowrap}} to force a line-break only when required, like this:

{{commons category|XXXX YYYY ZZZZ|{{nowrap|XXXX YYYY ZZZZ}}}}.

Suggest adding to Help page!

Hymek (talk) 23:03, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia to Commons[edit]

Thanks for the help. I will have a look and see what I can achieve :-) Rosser Gruffydd 11:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Steam car - developing edit war[edit]

Hi EdJogg - I would like your assistance on a technical steam engine matter. There is a small edit war developing and the argument is around a paragraph about the disadvantages of steam engines. Can you take a look and give me some guidance as to who is right. The discussion is on the articles talk page. NealeFamily (talk) 06:57, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:NealeFamily
Congratulations on your sterling work at improving the Steam car article. I must admit I haven't read your edits, but I've seen you've been very busy! When you've 'finished' I could give it a proof-read if you like.
Now, this edit IS problematic. Before looking at the article, and the edit war, my first thought was that you should refer the matter to User:Andy Dingley, as he has written most of Wikipedia's content about the many types of steam boiler!!!!
Ho-hum.
I will comment on the article itself on the talk page.
EdJogg (talk) 08:41, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Hey, include me out. I've already been warned off this once for having my "obvious disagreements" over it. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Fear not, I'm not expecting further input from you. NOW I know you were already involved, but I didn't at first (when I thought that comment). I'm just composing my response. That section is sorely lacking useful technical information, and those two referenced paragraphs are not actually helpful to the article.
EdJogg (talk) 09:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I can't work out, and have little interest in it, whether they're complaining about "radiator" as terminology, the uselessness of condensing from some theoretical standpoint (there wasn't any condenser vacuum on any road steamer I can see before the 1950s) or whether they just think that "99% of steam cars" were built without them. Yet someone at White (also Stanley and Doble) was clearly doing a lot of soldering to make something! Andy Dingley (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. I have a reference for condensers being fitted on Stanleys and Whites. The book also notes why they were not fitted to earlier Stanleys "...[the brothers reasoned] no one would want to travel more than forty miles in a day, so that was the capacity of the water and fuel tanks"!
EdJogg (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Nor does their past contributions history inspire much technical confidence. Oh well, my "braying ignorance" and I will go elsewhere. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I have noted the limited edit history of the complainant, but I have not examined the technical content of NealeFamily's edits. I agree with you that referenced material should not (normally) be removed, and that the information (such that it is) is missing from the article, but I also agree with them that the two paragraphs make little sense out of the context of the book from which they were taken.
Hence, my independent view is that the article is actually better off without the two paragraphs.
EdJogg (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Just so you both are clear about my position - I have no technical knowledge about steam engines so whether they have condensers or radiators or whatever I have no clue. What I was trying to achieve, and hopefully you will be able to do is some agreement over how the technical aspects are covered without it turning into a major war. Hopefully you are able to resolve the issue. My interest is purely a historic rather than a technical viewpoint. Hope this helps. Regards NealeFamily (talk) 05:18, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Ahh, thank you for the clarification.
From the number of your edits I perceived an interest in steam cars and had hoped that you might be able to fill in some of the technical blanks we've been highlighting.
But any improvements you can make are warmly welcomed and, as I mentioned elsewhere, if you felt moved to take on the restructuring of the article, I would certainly be pleased to offer proof-reading support.
As to the matter in hand, the 'edit war' should now be over, although the resultant lack of technical detail is still problematic.
Regards -- EdJogg (talk) 19:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I guess I am going to have to learn about steam engines. Thanks for your help and advice. I shall complete the history research (I am up to about 1970) and then take a look at a tidy up. As Andy Dingley said there are a number of inter-related articles that need tidying up. Regards NealeFamily (talk) 03:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome. And as I said, I'm happy to help with proof-reading or a similar specific request.
Unfortunately I have found that Wikipedia editing is rather addictive, so these days I mostly restrict myself to correcting errors I find when reading articles for research.
With regard to steam engines, it should be enough to recognise the different components and the general principles of operation -- (I've never attempted to understand the minutiae of the physics involved!) -- and this will help you appreciate the significance of the developments by each manufacturer.
Best regards -- EdJogg (talk) 08:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for all your assistance and advice NealeFamily (talk) 10:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I have entered all the steam cars I can find into the List of steam car makers, split the list into, hopefully, logical sections, and updated the comments. If you or Andy Dingley are aware of any missing ones let me know.

I am going to do another sweep through and then from there start on into the Steam car article. NealeFamily (talk) 01:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I doubt if I have any to add. All those I had a couple of sources for went into the first draft. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2015 (UTC)