User talk:Keith D/Archive 13

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

040506070809101112Archive 13141516171819202122304050


Hi Keith, As it rained (yet again!!) today, I thought I would try to make a start on editing York. The GA reviewer left some useful remarks and, as yet, no one seems to have taken it on board. I've done a bit of re-arranging and copyediting so far. Have you any idea how we can get shot of the lists? Most of the Noted York people are already on the List of people from York, but I can't find any where to put the City districts and surrounding villages. Any thoughts, please?--Harkey (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I will have to think about that one. There is a similar problem with East Riding of Yorkshire which has a list of places and a list of attractions that I could not work out what to do with. Keith D (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Oldham gets round it with a template that can be hidden, while Sheffield uses a sub article. Probably too many for the Oldham solution but the Sheffield one looks OK especially as we are covering York & City of York in a single article which the sub-article can explain. Keith D (talk) 20:03, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Do you mean Districts of Sheffield? It looks like a tidy solution. I was just discussing (over tea) how many ways an area can be divided up - like wards, constituencies, villages, postcodes, etc. The Sheffield idea seems to have mileage.--Harkey (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes that was the article I was referring to. Districts of Bristol is a basic list type one or there is the one PamD did following the Leeds merger at Places in Leeds. Keith D (talk) 20:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, yes! I like PamDs idea for a layout. I think I'll have to study that one carefully. A bit swish eh?--Harkey (talk) 20:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Glad to hear that you like it - please feel free to nick whichever ideas you fancy from it! The trick in making that table was to put it all together offline in Excel first - that way I could sort things (eg sort by ward, then add constituency easily) and fiddle around with it all. Then used a wonderful utility to convert from Excel to Wikitable - I think it was this one. Important to have something, even just a full stop, in the bottom right corner of your table when you copy and paste it into that utility, otherwise it gives an incomplete row and won't sort. Note the fiddle of {{sort|zz| }} (ie sort as "zz" but display as " ") to make empty cells sort after the filled ones, rather than at the top, as for Adwalton, and similar use of sortkey for the single-digit postcodes, because otherwise LS10 to LS19 would sort before LS2. Have fun! PamD (talk) 23:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Obviously not something to be tackled after "a glass of sherry"! :-) --Harkey (talk) 07:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent)Thanks for sorting out all the areas of York. I'm using the information that you are inputting for the table I'm constructing for York. I found a neat little toy Here today. It's O.K. if you have a street name in the area. Even tells you the nearest pub!!--Harkey (talk) 20:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I thought I would tackle them as you were attacking York. It kills a few birds at the same time, adding co-ordinates, infoboxes, civil parish category and distinguishing between York & City of York. I also finally got round to moving the City of York out to a dab page and making it a redirect to York so that links would work correctly. Though I think I may have added a place infobox to an area which may not be appropriate but will leave for now. Well done on knocking the York article into shape as the GA review was not really appropriate without any work been done on the article. Keith D (talk) 20:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
May be once you have the detail then we can complete the constituency_westminster field in the infoboxes which I have left blank on new ones. Keith D (talk) 20:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I don't know which one to add, in some cases. There are new constituency boundaries in some places. The current constituency (that of the sitting M.P.) is different from the one that will be used for the next election. The new York outer is a doughnut around the York central. It takes in chunks of old constituencies like Selby. --Harkey (talk) 07:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I noticed one of the infoboxes Stockton-on-the-Forest has both old and new in with a note that the new one is from 2009, though I assume that will be the next general election which could be 2010. I would guess that all of the affected places should have a note of the change added to the text so that it does not get forgotten that there was a change. Keith D (talk) 11:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
1st draft of Areas of York is in the pipeline. It needs a lot more work (links etc,) but the info is accurate (as of today). Another column about constituency changes in 2009/10 should be easy to add. I deleted some of the places in the list because they were a long way from York and others because they were (invented ?) sub-divisions of other areas.--Harkey (talk) 12:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Looks OK, though I think I would call it Areas of the City of York to show it is not just York the place. As you say it needs the links etc. Keith D (talk) 13:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for your help in untangling the mess that was made of George W. Bush substance abuse controversy. JamesMLane t c 01:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Kingston upon Hull

No rush. I will be away for the same period. I might work on it tomorrow and/or Saturday, but it will not be assessed until 2 June at the earliest.Pyrotec (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I may just kill that section, another editor added it and it did not really fit in anywhere. May be just move the link to the See also section for now? Keith D (talk) 22:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, great news to have managed GA for Hull at long last!! I'm glad you are back in time to cast an eye over the newsletter. I was a bit nervous about running the bot to update article statistics, and amazed when it worked for me. I saw that you had looked at some of the new articles. Some might have been rated rather optimistically IMO.--Harkey (talk) 07:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I did have a quick look at the news letter and made a couple of changes to article activity but looks OK. I will have another look later today. I did think the new articles were rated a bit high but left them for the moment, I will get back to normal once I have got through the watchlist. Keith D (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure that we will find a definition for the "Urban Area" of Hull. When the Leeds controversy was going on I tried for ages to find one for the Leeds Urban Area. The ONS site gave a population figure but no definition of the area involved. Maybe Hull will be different though?--Harkey (talk) 07:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Lincolnshire or not?

Have a look at Talk:Gillian Merron and at the "Humberside and Lincolnshire" section. Is not Grimsby in Lincolnshire? Go to Grimsby and they say they are from Lincolnshire. Your opinion would be helpful. I'm also getting BulldozerD11 to have a look as this as it is important for clarifying for Lincolnshire. --BSTemple (talk) 17:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hope my comment makes sense. Keith D (talk) 17:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
In a way, but I note that the Lincolnshire Council has started to include it when talking of Lincolnshire, hence I gave this link. It really comes down to the mess they made in the early 1970's. People class even today Grimsby as being in Lincolnshire and if people get their way we may even see the removal of North and East and just have one complete Lincolnshire. Thank you for having a look and if I can help you, let me know. --BSTemple (talk) 18:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Ferens Hall!

Hi Keith,

It appears a bone of contention to me that you edit Ferens Hall page. I understand that it is part of the "wikiproject yorkshire" and you have made many valuble updates since i created the page, as Ferens Hall librarian and University of Hull (The Owners) staff member.

Some images are attributed to indeviduals and organisations as appropriate and required by wikipedia regulations.

Regulations for Creative Commons :

The portion of the text i give reference to is as follows

" What are the terms of a Creative Commons license?

The key terms of the core suite of Creative Commons licenses are: Attribution, NonCommercial, NoDerivatives and ShareAlike. These license elements are succinctly described as follows:

Attribution. You let people copy, distribute, display, perform, and remix your copyrighted work, as long as they give you credit the way you request. All CC licenses contain this property. "

As intended by the regulations the work has been stated on wikipedia commons images pages that:



This clearly states the name/s of the owner/organisation must be "attributed to the owner" on all pages the images are shown

I hope these regulations don't cause to much of an issue for yourself to follow

thankyou for your time


Anyone is free to edit any article page, there is no ownership of a page just a set of policies and agreements on what is acceptable and what is not. You will find that there is no attribution on any of the images in article space the attribution is on the image page only for wikipedia. If the image is used outside of wikipedia then it needs to have the attribution. Keith D (talk) 23:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see here for statement on the non-attribution in article space. Keith D (talk) 23:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the major update to the Ferens Hall Page it is most appreciated. Additional infomation about the halls history with references will be added as the dusty books in the library are sorted.

The infomation provided by John Treherne about his father Jim Treherne and Ferens Hall. I have no reference to Jim how ever there are many references to an A. J. Treherne. If you have contact with John could you confirm his dads actual first name.


Lexaris —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexaris (talkcontribs) 13:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I have no connection whatsoever to the hall or people there. Thanks are also due to Harkey (talk) who has been doing the referencing of the article. Keith D (talk) 13:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Lend me a hand?

Hey Keith,

I've noticed how active you are with Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire. I'm not really a content editor but I see the need for Redcar to be rewritten; could you assist me (just in terms of advice) if need be? I plan to start in about a fortnight.

I'll try to fix the Redcar and Cleveland template too in about a fortnight; I promised to do it a year ago and just forgot. Computerjoe's talk 16:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I just put the template on my todo list above, so may get round to that depending on how time goes. I will lend a hand where possible, though like you I am not a great contributor of content more of doing the tidy-up/clean-up things. I am currently working though my watchlist from the break I took last week, just got up to June so should be freer once I get back-up to date. Keith D (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Merged page

Recently, while you were away the article Sydenham, Warwickshire was merged into Leamington Spa. I am not happy with the way the merge discussion was closed to merge the page, the votes being 3 to 2 and the discussion was still underway the day before. It was formally listed as a merge for discussion, and for a controversial merge an administrator is generally asked to close the discussion, but this did not happen and the editor who closed the merge was involved in the discussion expressing an opinion to merge the page. Snowman (talk) 22:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Throw in my "vote", which would take the "votes" to 4 to 2, definitely a merge. Jenuk1985 | Talk 23:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I have commented at the page. I think that with only 3:2 that the originator of the merge should not have closed it. Especially as the original reason for the merge relies on page that is now a redirect to a dormant proposal. I would have closed as no consensus. Keith D (talk) 23:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Please note also that the article content was reduced by the nominator of the merge. Snowman (talk) 23:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Please note that I consider the attempt to complain here to another admin is a clear case of Wikipedia:Canvassing#Forum_shopping, and I am notifying the admin page of it. Widefox (talk) 13:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

References for lists of European election candidates

Hi - the references are from the UK Office of the European Parliament; the 2004 candidates are at [1] and the 1999 candidates are at [2]. I was planning to add the references to all the articles once I've finished adding names, but as it's taking a while, perhaps I should do so now. If you'd like to get in there first, please feel free! Warofdreams talk 13:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I may add the references but I guess that you may beat me to it as I am still working my way though article changes from my break last week just got up to June 2nd. Keith D (talk) 15:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, thanks, I've now added all the references. Warofdreams talk 18:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


Looks like the paper lad has lost his settings see User talk:JamesR.--Harkey (talk) 15:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - June 2009

Delivered June 2009 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 00:11, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Better late than never!! Now, what abut next month?!--Harkey (talk) 07:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
We have already had that one! May be you did not spot that but he tried to deliver July and I prodded him and he resent June, removing the attempt at July. Take a look in the page history. Keith D (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Seriously though I will not be around for delivery time of the next newsletter - away for about 2 weeks so will take ages to get back up to speed. May be if the aunt Sally takes off we can publicise that either in July or August. Though I think that we need to concentrate on vandalism patrol after the number of problems found going through my watchlist. May be an article on user watchlists and the project watchlist may be useful. Keith D (talk) 20:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Malvern Hills District Parishes

Many thanks for making the navbox template. Since I made the navbox it was on my 'to do' list but I hadn't got round to it. let me know if I can return a favour anytime. BTW, we're launching a Worcestershire project in a few days. Feel free to drop by. --Kudpung (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem - I just thought that it was more efficient than having all that text in several articles though I only change over the articles that happened to be on my watchlist. Good to see another regional project that is starting. There is a discussion about communication between projects & article improvements on the England project at the moment if you are interested. Keith D (talk) 11:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Aunt Sally's apprentices

Hi Keith,I really do think your idea is an excellent one. It is something that I would be willing to participate in both as a learner and tutor.I would certainly have welcomed such help.There were/are times when I found/find tasks too daunting to contemplate and a little shove in the right direction might be all that is needed. I think it could well help (experienced) others to realise that aggressive/negative edit summaries are not big and clever and are non-productive in the long run. As the whole purpose of WP is to build through co-operation I think your suggestion embodies the spirit of Wikipedia in a nutshell. I would be willing to give time to help in the running etc. of it, if it got off the ground.(Excuse any typos, my connection is so slow that I can go and have a coffee before a new page loads so I will not preview this.)--Harkey (talk) 12:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi Keith! Could you take a look at the image gallery added to the Brighouse article Churches section. It contains four images of stained glass. The article section indicates two churches have stained glass windows from the William Morris factory. The image descriptions clearly indicate three of them used to be in St James church in Brighouse, yet the fourth image description indicate its from a building in the Bradford area. However all four windows are now in the Cliffe Castle Museum and depicted in that article. I don't really see that these images are relevant to the Brighouse article, but would welcome a second opinion! Richard Harvey (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I had a quick look and the relevance is from St James Church in Brighouse, apart from the last one which is only a possibility of being from Brighouse. The 4 images are OK on the Cliffe Castle Museum article though that article needs the layout looking at as it looks like a collection of images in random placings with little text. The differing image sizes also does not enhance the article. Back to Brighouse, the sentence introducing the images indicates there are 2 buildings with stained glass, one of which is given in the captions but what is the other? I think that the sentence needs rewriting into a paragraph to give details of the churches involved with a note on the stained glass and its current location. It should include other churches if there are any. I would then have an image of St James Church, with may be one of the stained glass images. Whatever happens the last image should not really be there as is is only possibly from the place. Keith D (talk) 16:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Having looked up some information for the location of the church to go and take a photo I have now discovered that the church was demolished in the 1970's with the land used for residential properties. additionally the dates given on this website:- [3] show the dates of installation of the windows in St James church to be three years before the ones shown in the images were made, although other windows were installed there is no indication they were from the Wm Morris factory. I will amend the article entry accordingly, with a reference and a wikilink to the Cliffe Museum page to save duplication. Richard Harvey (talk) 07:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Closest prep school to Driffield

1 - Pocklington is not a prep school 2 - Pocklington is 16.5 miles from Driffield and takes 40-45 minutes. Source - Google Maps. (Note - you must use the correct postcode for Pocklington School to get an accurate distance and timing.) 3 - Woodleigh is 14.9 miles from Driffield and takes 25-30 minutes. Source - Google Maps. 4 - Your revert was not based and fact and was unsourced, and it was therefore unprofessional and antiWP to revert the edit.

Please do not revert this edit otherwise you will likely start an edit war. (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I will not be reverting again but may consider removing the sentence all together as the fact is really irrelevant to the Driffield article. The distances you are using are road distances rather than as the crow flies distances. You appear to have a conflict of interest here and to be trying to push / promote the school on wiki. Keith D (talk) 15:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a helicopter?! Relevance is a matter of opinion in your case. I prefer to go by WP:notability. I have no interest in the schoool, just WP, so refrain from personal comments please. (talk)

KeithD it appears you are now deliberately trying to slag off the school. Complaint has been filed with WP. Please cease vandalism of this page. (talk) 10:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Keith D

Do you have a life outside of petty corrections to Wikipedia? To the casual observer it doesn't seem that you have. I make this comment in the spirit of healthy comment only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

WPYorks Template

Hi Keith, Have you any idea how to get the WPYorks banner/template to give an assessment section, like this Template:WikiProject History. It would save a lot of work typing stuff out and some of our more experienced editors might be able to provide more valuable assessments than just a blunt grade on the article. What do you think?--Harkey (talk) 14:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean the check list for the B class assessment? Just a warning on this one that if enabled all B class articles will become C class articles unless the check list is completed. I found this out after it was enabled on WP:WARWICKSHIRE. Keith D (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
See User_talk:Keith_D/Archive_12#References, about half way through the discussion, for details of that change. Keith D (talk) 16:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Looks like a non-starter then. My hope was to reduce work a bit on assessing some articles which seem somewhat inflated and others that have improved a lot. Back to the drawing board!!--Harkey (talk) 12:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Woodleigh School

The revert you made was text from someone with a known vendetta. Is that you? Please do not repeat it. (talk) 10:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The text is sourced to a reliable source the York Press which is a criteria for inclusion. The person posting is irrelevant. Both positive and negative for articles are required to give a balanced view point. Keith D (talk) 10:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not joining in with the accusations of vendetta, which seem unlikely, but I do question whether it needs to be present in the article. The crime confessed to did not concern a student at the school; it is merely that the teacher worked there up to 2007. I am not sure if it would be appropriate in all cases for the criminal records of all staff and others associated with a school to be present in its article. Really this is a fact about the individual and its link with the school is somewhat tenuous. Exactly why does it need to be in there? Cheers DBaK (talk) 10:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
May be it does not, I was explaining above why I reverted out, following on from the reversion by another editor. I did not dig in to the detail, I thought that it was relevant as did the previous editor who reverted. Keith D (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for that. I guess it might be worth taking it to the article's Talk page and trying to reach a consensus (ha!). Looking at the article's edit history it does look like a bit of a battleground, which always makes me wonder! Cheers, DBaK (talk) 11:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
It has been a problem with IP users for a bit. IP users have been trying to promote the school by adding links to it in place articles in about a 25 mile radius of the school. Keith D (talk) 11:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Oh. 25 miles? Blimey! The joys of Wikipedia, eh? :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 07:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

RAF Fylingdales

According to the OS map and this it is in Lockton Civil Parish.--Harkey (talk) 15:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

A bit more (not much) on election results at [4]--Harkey (talk) 15:31, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

List of articles edited

I was looking for a place where I can access a full list of all the Wikipedia articles I have edited but I cannot find any. The closet thing to it I can find is one, but it only shows the article names of the top 100 articels edited. Please help. De Mattia (talk) 01:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry cannot help with this one. You could try asking at the help desk or Village Pump. Keith D (talk) 12:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

How do you start a wikiproject

I would like to start the wikiproject 'Blue Mountains'. Please tell me how do I do this, do I need authority etc. De Mattia (talk) 06:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals for proposing new WikiPorojects. Keith D (talk) 10:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi, I've proposed an alliance between Wps Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire to help with 'Constructive Collaboration' as I call it between groups in the local area to help with research and share tips, advice etc. On the talk page I have received positive advice and on WP England but the other 2 haven't replied. I was wondering how you felt about the plan and whether you knew how I could do this. As far as I know it hasn't been done yet.

95jb14 (talk) 18:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I am all for interaction between wikiprojects if it can be achieved we have discussed a little at WP:England. May be you could have a look at User:Keith D/sandbox3 which I put together and offered up as an Aunt Sally of an idea that could help to get GA/FA knowledge spread around. Nev1 tried to get WP:NOTTS interested in operating an experiment but got no responce, may be Lincolnshire could try it out and see what happens. Keith D (talk) 18:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Burn Bridge

Hi Keith. Thanks for the help with the infobox - I had been struggling with that one. I still haven't managed to get the map into it. Thanks again.--Storye book (talk) 20:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I must be blind - I did not spot the missing map. I will fix that now. Keith D (talk) 20:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Ooh - just seen your map - thank you! Looks much better now. Cheers.--Storye book (talk) 21:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

York again

Please will you have a look at York once more when you get a minute. I've tugged and pulled at it on and off all day. Now I can't see the wood for the trees anymore. I was hoping other editors would come in!! Thanks--Harkey (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much. You must have spent a lot of time on looking at York. I'm really grateful for such a thorough review. I hadn't quite forgotten about Peasholm Park. It's one of those things that drifts in and out of consciousness!! It's on my to do list now so should drift in more often. Thanks again.--Harkey (talk) 07:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking again at York. I was just looking up the Hanseatic League thing - not much joy online. Also, have you ever heard of York being called the Grand Old Duke? I can't find a ref and in all my time in Yorkshire I've never heard of it being called that. I think someone is having us on!!--Harkey (talk) 19:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I needed a distraction from the North Yorkshire Council election, 2009 which is slow going as I am having to recalculate all of the percentages as the council website gives figures worked out differently per district/division!
Not heard if the Grand Old Duke either, may be we should just remove it. Just had a look at the reference on the Kingston upon Hull page and it does not actually mention Hanseatic League just Baltic ports. May be there is a reference on one of the other articles in the template that could be used. Keith D (talk) 19:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, what next :-) on York?--Harkey (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi Keith, thanks for the assistance with editing ! I delighted to say I now have a new, uptodate photograph of Selina Scott for her page - I am the owner, have uploaded it onto my userpage but I cannot work out in the short time I have to give Wiki how to place it as the main photograph & move the other one further down the page . AAghh! Please can you help ?? Many thanks, Lorraine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcopolomaya (talkcontribs) 12:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I have added the image for you. You can move the other one down further if you want. Keith D (talk) 13:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You're a star ! many thanks ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcopolomaya (talkcontribs) 13:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


This site has a lot of useful election result info I'm not sure of its provenance, though Local Authority Byelection Results.--Harkey (talk) 07:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


For Redcar. Computerjoe's talk 23:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

General contractor

Keith, sorry but there is not any talk on the page General contractor. But i will add, that i,am not advertising non promoting the site. Also the web site is not mine. But on to the subject, If the site i added is to be removed, why not the site, Associated Builders and Contractors. Because these two sites are the same, except the one i listed is much older and it includes Canada as well, it covers all of North America. Have a Great day, Randall O

I did not investigate existing links in the article just the changes. Looking again probably all of the external links on the article need removing as none of them seem to add to the article and probably fail WP:EL. Keith D (talk) 11:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

July newsletter

Yes, I will think of something to write about. How about "adding references" as we seem to be getting a lot of unsourced text on some articles?--Harkey (talk) 13:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds OK, there will be lots more articles tagged soon if the bot get approved. They are planning to sweep all articles and tag when no references are found and most of the smaller settlement articles fall into this category. Keith D (talk) 16:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
If you would like to like to modify anything at the text here, please do. Its just a first draft, so far.--Harkey (talk) 19:00, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
What do you think about producing a Watchlist for just our Yorkshire top priority articles on a WP:Yorks sub page? A link could then be added to the newsletter to show recent activity on just the selected articles. It might encourage more constructive activity on the priority articles. I made a sort of list here some time ago and I find it useful. Also, maybe some of the Start class top priority articles could now be classed as C class.I would be willing to try adding comments to the comments pages if you could oversee my first efforts for daft errors.--Harkey (talk) 08:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
PS Just added cleanup list extract to newsletter. Revert if you think its too much.--Harkey (talk) 09:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Could do, may be give a push in next month's newsletter. Probably Sheffield needs attention at the moment as it will loose its FA status as no one appears to be doing any work on it. May be we could encourage some work on the four county articles which are the ones with the lower grading. Though a prod on the project talk page for South Yorkshire & West Yorkshire by Jza84 did not get any response. May be we also need to start a state of play for the high-class pages to see where we are with them. I know there is some interest in some articles in there, Redcar is an example which I did a review on similar to York for someone, though that one needs expansion once the problems are sorted out. Keith D (talk) 09:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I see what Jza84 means about the Yorkshire articles. However I think that editing anything with Yorkshire in the title is a bit like Skinny dipping. We would all rather someone else did it!!I will have a go though (the former not the latter!)when we have an article drive for them next month.--Harkey (talk) 16:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
As there are over 100 High-class entries may need to review them to see if they are really high priority articles and to see if any in the Medium-class ones that need revising upward. Keith D (talk) 17:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Are there any Guidelines for help with establishing importance?--Harkey (talk) 17:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Do not think so. I put all large towns and boroughs at high. Also areas, top level sports teams, major infrastructure items and some prominent people. Though others could have rated some of them using different criteria. Keith D (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent)I adapted the WP:GM importance scale and put it on WP:YORKS assessment page. It will be consistent with their ratings and looks pretty similar to the way we have been rating article importance.--Harkey (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably not quite what I have been doing as I have villages as low unless they are particularly big/important. I also have all open railway stations as Mid with all disused stations at low. Keith D (talk) 18:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I think it needs a tweak or two, as well.--Harkey (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


Thank you. I will get round to adding the Independent Schools to the Hull article at some point. I didn't realise what I was getting into with a project as all encompassing as every school in England! Francium12 (talk) 12:36, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Boro and League

Yes, I did read the note from the editor but: (look at those playing in the bottom box) (same as with CCC)

You can do the same for Scunthorpe, Gillingham etc.

Editor bias on wikipedia? Well I never!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 13:00, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia "ghost" websites

I have been doing a decent amount of editing recently on Wikipedia, especially with referencing and removing 'citation needed' tag, and I have noticed how many websites that there are on the Internet which have identical pages (or a previous version) of the Wikipedia page of the same topic (and some of them don't state that they are "ghost" website of Wikipedia - any copyright issue??). I find these very annoying and I am wondering if thre should be a list on Wikipedia or something made to tell people what are and what aren't "ghost" sites of Wikipedia so then people don't use them for references, which is what I have found in some articles, because that defeats the whole purpose of using references. Thank-you. De Mattia (talk) 07:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

As you say sites that take material from Wikipedia should never be used as a reference as it is not classed as a reliable source. These sites should display the appropriate notices as per Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. There is already a list of these sites to be found at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks which should be added to if new ones are found. You can also use that page for reporting sites that fail to comply with the reuse license. Keith D (talk) 10:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

040506070809101112Archive 13141516171819202122304050