User talk:Hassocks5489/Archives/2010/July
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Hassocks5489. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
DYK for Steine House
 | On July 4, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Steine House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Sussex Heights
| On July 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sussex Heights, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Hastings Net Shops/Huts
It was reported on TV this morning that these were upgraded to II* status recently, maybe a separate article is called for - Hastings Net Shops or maybe Hastings Net Huts would be a better title per WP:COMMONNAME. Mjroots (talk) 14:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hiya Hassocks5489, I had a good look through dozens of old Railway Heralds, but wasn't able to find any details about the rolling stock used on the Ebbw Valley Line. Someone has found this reference saying that the stock operated is 150 DMUs, but the source is 2 years old. Do you think the reference can still be used to note the current rolling stock? Cheers, Daicaregos (talk) 13:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
B&H buildings template
Hello, long time no speak! I'm writing to ask about the logic you've got in mind for Template:B&H Buildings. I notice you've removed the Chain Pier which I added. I can imagine that's because it's no longer extant, and that's fair if the template is intended to be for extant buildings only. But in that case, it's inconsistent to have the List of demolished places of worship which it recently gained. The Astoria and Hippodrome "formers" are a third scenario, although there's a much stronger case for buildings of which fragments survive of course. But either way there should be a clear policy attached to the template. – Kieran T (talk) 22:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Regency Square, Brighton
Re the windmills, Dawes states it was a post mill. However, p109 of Hemmings (online link in East Sussex windmills list) states a smock mill - it is possible that either there were 2 mills, or that one replaced the other. If you want to put in a section header for the windmills, I'll fill in the details when you're not busy editing - unless you have Dawes book and want to do it yourself. Mjroots (talk) 13:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- Dawes book has an illustration of the mill being moved. That was definitely a post mill. Mjroots (talk) 19:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- Windmill needs to be wikilinked. Mjroots (talk) 12:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)