User talk:Mjroots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
I miss the "Orange Bar of Death" notifying me when I had a new talk page message.
en This user is a native speaker of English.
nl-2 Deze gebruiker heeft een middelmatige kennis van het Nederlands.
fr-1 Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.
Obscured jaguar.jpg Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

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.



  • For barnstars I've been awarded, see here
  • If you feel that I deserve a barnstar, please add it here.

DYK & ITN[edit]

Symbol question.svg This user has written or expanded 233 articles featured in the Did You Know section on the Main Page.

My DYKs are on this sub-page and my ITNs are on this sub-page. Earlier discussions are archived here

Dyk25CE.svg 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)
Dyk50CE.svg 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)
Dyk100CE.svg 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)
Dyk200CE.svg The 200 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
The D.Y.K. Project thanks you for your tireless contributions. The Interior (Talk) 17:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for PS Castalia[edit]

Thank you for thanking me. I actually noticed only one of the typos, but I use Firefox and it apparently spellchecks everything by default. When I went into edit mode, not only was the error I noticed underlined with a wavy line, so were other things. I had to sort out the genuine mistakes from a lot of "false positives"; I hope I didn't change anything that was right.

You are obviously a very active contributor to Wikipedia. I am mostly a consumer -- I benefit from the work you and others like you do. Thank you very much.

I have no idea whether this is the right place for this comment. You replied to my talk page and this is your talk page, so I hope it is. If not, you will move it. Gms3591 (talk) 07:21, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Want to expand Peace in Africa for a DYK?[edit]

Hi Mjroots, you and Haus seem to have good access to merchant marine sources. Want to expand Peace in Africa (ship) for DYK? Djembayz (talk) 11:55, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Any additions to Malahat (schooner) at DYK?[edit]

Hi again! I've put in a self nom for Malahat (schooner) at DYK. Perhaps you can spruce it up a bit. Djembayz (talk) 21:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1912 Brooklands Flanders Monoplane crash[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of 1912 Brooklands Flanders Monoplane crash 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! Chris857 (talk) 02:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Bump. Chris857 (talk) 03:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/De Akkermolen[edit]

Ping. Hope you're doing well. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/QSMV Dominion Monarch at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wendhausen Windmill[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Wendhausen Windmill at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Eckwersheim derailment has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]


Old discussions are archived here.

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirateSchwede66K6kaEaldgythFerretCyberpower678Mz7PrimefacDodger67
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg BriangottsJeremyABU Rob13

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Scale of justice 2.svg Arbitration

Nuvola apps knewsticker.png Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg AmortiasDeckillerBU Rob13
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg RonnotelIslanderChamal NIsomorphicKeeper76Lord VoldemortSherethBdeshamPjacobi

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
  • Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
  • A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Delete me![edit]


@Alridge: - I can't delete your account, but I have deleted your user page, which is what I think you meant. Mjroots (talk) 06:23, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Appalling edit summaries[edit]

Could you please strike my appalling edit summaries relating to extremism and Islam/Muslims? Thanks. GretzkyCC (talk) 08:50, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done Mjroots (talk) 09:33, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed XnualaCJOldelpasoBerean HunterJimbo WalesAndrew cKaranacsModemacScott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

A couple of requests[edit]

Can you please closethis AFD? Another editor closed it improperly but I reverted it due to that editor being involved. He or she had taken part in the discussion. You may want to have a word with User Wykx and inform them about WP:INVOLVED. Thanks....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

@WilliamJE: - both  Done Mjroots (talk) 10:55, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. This AFD can use closing too....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:58, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 Done Mjroots (talk) 11:04, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Years in motoring AfD[edit]

I don't think the procedural close was the right ruling there. It's clear Burning Pillar was intending to nominate every article in that category for deletion, not just the category itself. He only nominated the category itself because it would be empty (which could have been done by speedy if and when the articles were deleted.) But the fact that it was listed under the category and not one of the individual articles in the category (with the others mentioned as well and tagged properly, as they were) is not enough for a procedural close. That being said, it's clear consensus was to keep and it probably could have been SNOW-ed anyway. Smartyllama (talk) 13:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@Smartyllama: - Hmmm, I didn't realise this was a cat and article nomination, which is not normally how these thing are done. Although the debate had been running quite a while, it did not show up in CAT:AFD/P earlier in the week, which is why I didn't notice it until this morning. Would you prefer I reopened the discussion, leave it closed or do something else? Mjroots (talk) 16:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Either reopen it until the end or close it as snow keep (which would be a reasonable close in light of the consensus so far). The only reason he nominated the category for deletion was because it would be empty after the articles were deleted. Which, of course, is not how it's normally done, but doesn't make the discussion on the articles invalid. As I said, it could easily have been closed as snow keep at that point, so if you want to close as snow keep, that's fine. If you're not comfortable doing that, in my opinion it should be reopened and allowed to run its course, then closed as normal. Smartyllama (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
@Smartyllama: - I've reopened the discussion and asked that it be allowed to run for a further 24 hours over what would have been the original time for closure, which will give everyone a chance to comment over at least a full week. Mjroots (talk) 17:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)


Hello, remember me? You added rollback to my user rights. I can't find how to resign user rights and would like to; any suggestions? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@Keith-264: I can adjust your user rights. Do you want rollback removed, or something else? Mjroots (talk) 18:23, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the swift reply, all of them please. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 Done Mjroots (talk) 18:41, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, sorry to put you to the trouble. Keith-264 (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).


Administrator changes

added KaranacsBerean HunterGoldenRingDlohcierekim
removed GdrTyreniusJYolkowskiLonghairMaster Thief GarrettAaron BrennemanLaser brainJzGDragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news


  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017[edit]


News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug BellDennis BrownClpo13ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusBYandmanBjarki SOldakQuillShyamJondelWorm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Request for reduction in protection level - Windmill[edit]

The article has been semi-protected since 2011. It has had very few incidents of vandalism so I don't think it needed to be indefinitely protected. Its risk level should be about the same as any other article of that size. What do you think? Greg (talk) 15:10, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@Greggydude: - I'm willing to unprotect and see how things go. Mjroots (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

balloon crash[edit]

pilot had taken drugs and weather was not clear, may be time to name the pilot if he was at fault Bachcell (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@Bachcell: Have replied at talk:2016 Lockhart hot air balloon crash, which is the better venue for this discussion. Mjroots (talk) 07:54, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Russian Defence Ministry Tupolev Tu-154 crash[edit]

Regarding this edit, the cited source says 93. Other sources I have looked at give 92 as the number of dead. The one that said 91 yesterday (Sky News) has been changed to 92.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

@Toddy1: Hmmm, ASN are pretty good at correcting errors so I'll let them know. Feel free to change the ref to any of the others that state 92. Mjroots (talk) 10:41, 26 December 2016 (UTC)


Hi and thanks for your work. Can I ask, are you editorially interested in the field itself or just the crash? The only reason I ask is that I was a bit nonplussed by the latest contribution from a new editor here. It is by no means all bad - far from it - but does have some regrettable features. Simply reverting is perhaps not what is needed but unthreading the good bits (e.g. checking what is still referenced etc) looks a bit of a job - I'm not sure I'm up to it. What do you think? Cheers DBaK (talk) 16:04, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered: I'm interested in both the field and the accident, but am concentrating on the accident for now. Just finished reading the final report. Plenty to absorb and digest. The issue you raise, and the final report, are probably best discussed on the respective article's talk page. Mjroots (talk) 16:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks very much for that. I see that someone else is already helping with the airfield so I think I will stand down from that concern! Yes, much to take in in the final report. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:13, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk discussion[edit]

Take it here[1] That's the applicable WikiProject....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:54, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Geotags, Grid refs etc,[edit]

Geo Links and Geograph[edit]

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)

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)

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

Checking inline geotags[edit]

  • 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)

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


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)

Problem with gbmapping and oscoor templates[edit]

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)

Grid refs[edit]

I did not like having to display grid refs without spaces. At long last I have got round to asking someone and doing this very simple edit. The php that it calls was already prepared to receive spaces. That means you could do this edit to other articles that call oscoor (which is now a redirect). But certainly, I suggest using {{gbmappingsmall}} in any future case. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 18:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I have now implemented oscoor elimination as a tool - see Template talk:oscoor. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 19:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


Moved from my user page
Yes indeed! A terrific place for browsing old memories and old haunts as well! Thanks for the reminder. Palmeira (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, the FAQ says CC-BY-SA-2.0 but I think that should still usable. We just have to maintain attribution. LeadSongDog come howl! 03:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Medway watermills[edit]

Dear User:Mjroots. For what I have understand, you are a main contributor to the template page Template:Medway watermills diagram. As of now, this page is on overflow, and I am trying to empty the Category:Pages_where_template_include_size_is_exceeded. My opinion is as follows:

  1. your original page, written using {{BS-map}} could be renamed as Template:Medway watermills diagram/src.
  2. by the way, a new option, all could be added (beside upper, middle, lower), to reproduce what happens when <notinclude>1</notinclude> is set.
  3. thereafter, this page could be compiled to a new page Template:Medway watermills diagram, written using {{routemap}}. This gives a new template, with far less transclusions, and therefore more efficient when itself transcluded into some other page.
  4. And now, we can have side by side the all map and the upper+middle+lower one. And we can see that the junction middle--lower is correct, while the junction upper--middle is not optimal.

I have reproduced these steps at 2=User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram/src, 3=User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram, 4=User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram/test. Could you fix, in your template, the point .4. (see the test page), i.e. what is happening near Salman's Farm Mill ? And, moreover, what is your opinion about the whole process ? In fact, I really have no practice of these BS-map templates and I can't figure if people are really working directly with {{routemap}} or are using {{BS-map}} and then compiling. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 15:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pldx1: - I understand that there is a size issue, but I'm not sure what you mean by "what is happening near Salman's Farm Mill". I see not problem with the diagram at all. It is displaying correctly. I created the diagram line by line using the BS-map system, if that helps you. It is complete and is unlikely to need to be altered, which is a good thing. There has been talk at the Trains WikiProject recently where an alternative system was proposed which gets around the size issue at a cost of needing a degree in computing to be able to edit the diagram. Is the size issue that bad that the diagrams need to be tampered with? Mjroots (talk) 15:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@Mjroots:. Please open User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway watermills diagram/test and search for Yalding Mill. On the left, i.e. on the 'all' map, the next object after Yalding Mill is Wateringbury Stream. On the right, i.e. on the middle+lower map, we have Yalding Mill, a to mouth link, a to source link and then Wateringbury Stream. This behavior is what was expected. Let us now compare with the junction between upper and middle. Searching for Salman's Farm, we see that some objects, namely Ensfield Mill, Limit of navigation, Ramhurst Mill, Powder Mills, Town Lock and Town Mill, are on the left, but not on the right. This shouldn't occur, but I have no idea of how to proceed, since I know nothing about the Medway river. Concerning the other points, I will try to find the discussion your are mentioning, at Trains WikiProject. Have a good day. Pldx1 (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@Pldx1: It would appear that you are using the new system. Looks like a few lines of code have got missed out somewhere to cause that error which you describe. I see it now I know exactly what to look for.
Can't help with the fix though. Don't understand that system at all. Mjroots (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@Mjroots:. Oh no, I am not using the new system ! To tell it crudely, there are programmers, you, me, other people. They are using programming languages. Here, {{BS-map}} and the sequel. There are computers. They are using assembly language. Here {{routemap}}. Obviously some geeks are writing directly in assembly language, but most of the programmers are using a compiler, to translate from programming language into assembly language. Here, the translation is not too difficult: what should be done on the human side is described at Template:Routemap/doc#Transition_from_legacy_BS_row_template_to_Routemap_markup i.e. some substitutions that are easy to automatize. And all the rest is computer made when the subst are proceeded.

Again, Medway watermills[edit]

Hello. I have done some work about Template:Medway watermills diagram. I came here from a general concern about overflow. My interest for this specific template comes from its complexity that provides some clues about the problems to solve for compiling {{BS-map}} into {{routemap}}. May I recall that I do not consider replacing the former by the later, but organizing the coexistence of both systems, where people can write and test in their favorite language, and compile their sources at any moment of the process.

Once again, I know nothing about the Medway river, and it would be great that you control User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway/full written solution and see if my proposals for the upper, middle, and lower maps are sound. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 11:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pldx1: If I understand it correctly, the full diagram is now on the left. Looking good although there is some random bolding of names that needs addressing. I'm sure this minor problem can be overcome. As I said earlier, this diagram is very unlikely to need to be amended, apart from the names of a few mills not identified by name which may possibly become identified in the future. I see no benefit in adding roads, railways etc. It would all become far too complicated and cluttered. This is a river and mills diagram, best to keep it that way. Mjroots (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The diagram on the left comes from the actual template i.e. Template:Medway watermills diagram. The only changes were compilation (and bolding four locations near the jointures of the partial maps). On the contrary, the three maps on the right (each one below the other) are the new ones, obtained from assembling the parts and changing the visibility of block14 (at the junction of upper and middle part). This is to be compared with the previous User:Pldx1/Bs-map/Medway_watermills_diagram/test. What is your opinion about taking back block 18 (Eldridge Lock etc) in the middle part ? Pldx1 (talk) 12:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "taking back block 18". The only problem I can see with the right hand diagrams is that the continuation arrow on the top diagram is the wrong colour. Mjroots (talk) 13:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

List of windmills in Ille-et-Vilaine[edit]


I did a correction on this list and I'm curious: why is there names in bold or in italic on List of windmills in Ille-et-Vilaine?

Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 17:04, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: Bold text denotes mill is standing, italics denotes remains only. Mjroots (talk) 17:06, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick answer. I added a note on the table to be more explicit (and if I find time, I'll probably translate this list on the French Wikipédia). Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 17:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: Thanks. There are other French windmill lists, all linked from the List of windmills in France. I gave each département a separate list once it reached 20 windmills. Mjroots (talk) 17:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Veldkamps Meuln[edit]

Would you be interested in helping to expand the Veldkamps Meuln article? – Editør (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

@Editør: - done. Article needs adding to the List of Rijksmonuments in Groningen (province), but I'm not sure where it fits in. Mjroots (talk) 17:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your help so far. That list contains only seven places and is far from complete. Wouldn't it be easier to use (sub)categories for this? – Editør (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Do you maybe have a source for the storeys (total of seven storeys with a stage at the third)? Because I couldn't find anything about it in the windmill database. – Editør (talk) 21:27, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
@Editør: - Look at the photos in the article, at Commons and on the Molendatabase website. As for the list of Rijksmonuments, take a look at the List of Rijksmonuments in Friesland. That is a better laid out list. Mjroots (talk) 05:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I just don't think a list with all 2,557 rijksmonumenten in the province of Groningen will be very useful. – Editør (talk) 15:20, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
When looking at the photos I see windows at different heights, but I cannot tell whether every window indicates a separate floor in the interior. I'm pretty sure it isn't the case for the farm on this photo and that has Veldkamps Meuln in the background. – Editør (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Nicholas Winton[edit]

Thanks for trying. Great to see such important real world news taking centre stage yet again. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi again. I was wondering if you'd had any response at wp:cz about the class of the Order of the White Lion awarded to Winton? Although I have more or less given up on the ITN nomination, I'm still intrigued. The report at PrageuPost suggests that both awards were made at the same class, but does not explicitly. I'v also scoured all of the top Google hits in Czech (with the help of Google translate!) but have drawn a blank. As User talk:Fuebaey has pointed out, we don't to seem to have any reliable sources yet for the class. One imagines that there would be a Czech Government website somewhere that would put this matter beyond doubt. Many thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh well, at least we found out it was a Class 1, the same as Churchill's. So some satisfaction. Now the ITN nomination has timed out and dropped off the queue, of course, so any difference in consensus makes no difference, I guess. Hope you are well. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Peter Cazalet[edit]

Nice article there. Might be worth trying to find a DYK? from it - maybe the fact about him teaching Elizabeth Taylor to ride possibly? Can you check something from his military career? Article says he was potentially recommended for a Military Medal, but I would imagine by that point Cazalet was already an office and would have been line for a Military Cross - could you have a look at your source to check it? --Bcp67 (talk) 15:07, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Source is online and states Military Medal. As for DYK, that one would work, as would Albert Roux being his personal chef. Mjroots (talk) 18:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
OK I can see what's happened with the source there, having read the online article from The Guards Magazine now - the recommendation of the MM refers to a different soldier, a Guardsman - eligible for the Military Medal. Cazalet was the soldier's CO - "Two days later at a laager on a German farm, Gdsm Cumbley’s squadron commander, Peter Cazalet, called him in and told him he would be recommended for an award, but despite a letter of recommendation to Lt Col Windsor Lewis, he was to be disappointed; there was no Military Medal". I'm going to remove the mention from the article. Agree about Albert Roux too, I might nominate this for DYK with a couple of Alt hooks. --Bcp67 (talk) 18:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
@Bcp67: - no problem, thanks. If you nominate for DYK you won't need to do a QPQ. Mjroots (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I think they've changed the rules lately and anyone nominating has to do a QPQ, it's no problem as I've done a few DYK reviews here and there. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I've done about as much as I think his cricket career warrants. I'm not sure I believe the story about him turning down the captaincy of Kent for his horse-racing interests: Percy Chapman, as an ex-England captain, was pretty well-ensconced in the job for as long as he wanted it, and Bryan Valentine, a far better cricketer than Cazalet, played fairly regularly and acted as Chapman's deputy for the times whenever the great man's conviviality got in the way of his ability to do the job, which happened more and more across the 1930s. Does the local reference give a date when this captaincy offer took place? Johnlp (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that's probably wise. It may well be that he was encouraged to make the couple of appearances for Kent in the 1932 season, as they probably remembered his 150 for them in 1928; but it didn't really work out. I'm surprised that he didn't play for Oxford at all after he was dropped in 1928, not even in the trial match for 1929: could it be that he left the university after two years and didn't finish his degree? Over to you to delve some more if you wish. Johnlp (talk) 10:36, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Copyrighted images[edit]

Note to self

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

File:N269RV.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:N269RV.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Russavia Let's dialogue 04:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:26, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden windmill frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Chillenden mill part frame.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I've deleted both images. Wikipedia will be poorer without them, but it's not worth a slow edit war to keep them up. Mjroots (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Loose Valle Mills.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Loose Valle Mills.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Fixed Mjroots (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rakaia-painting.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Rakaia-painting.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


Would this image meet NFC? - [2]? I want to use it in an article we have been working on. Cheers, FriyMan talk 18:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@FriyMan: There is a very good chance that an image can be used under WP:NFCC rules, if it can be shown to meet all criteria. Mjroots (talk) 18:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I will upload the image under WP:NFC. I will update the infobox. Cheers, FriyMan talk 19:09, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
@FriyMan: - done my best to argue for the retention of the file. Fingers crossed. Mjroots (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Nomination of October 2013 United Kingdom storm for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article October 2013 United Kingdom storm is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/October 2013 United Kingdom storm until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Oddbodz (talk) 20:27, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

St Jude storm[edit]

Suggest you take a look at St Jude storm.Martin451 22:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Typhoon Haiyan[edit]

If/when they get enough information, we'll consider splitting them then. But for now, it's rather silly to have such stubby sections. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Otham Abbey[edit]

I'd be inclined to link it only to List of monastic houses in England (which has already been done); however, if I ever get round to writing an article about St Laurence's Chapel, Otteham Court, I will link that to List of former places of worship in Wealden and Grade II* listed buildings in East Sussex and provide a backlink to Otham Abbey in both cases. (I did come across some useful material on the chapel a while ago, possibly in one of the Sussex Archaeological Collections; it's probably in one of my folders somewhere.) Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 22:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Stanmer Church[edit]

Hi Mj. I would not object to it being mentioned briefly (not necessarily under a separate header – just within the Histroy section, as it is now, would suffice), but only if a good reliable source can be found. Until such a source can be found, I would be inclined to move the sentence in question to the Talk page with a note to that effect. (I remember watching that episode again recently and thinking "Ah, that looks familiar" – the last time I saw it was before I'd been to Stanmer Park!) Must dash now – end of lunch break! Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 14:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Iran article[edit]

Hello, Just as a proposal: If you would agree, can I replace current references with new ones (in particular #1,#2,#3 in conclusion section of talk page that have been confirmed by you) ? Since these new references confirms that Iran and Persia are synonymous and seems to be more clear and more prestigious than current references. I'll do this, Iff you are agreed, otherwise I do nothing. Regards Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

@Aidepikiwnirotide: Yes, go ahead and edit, but bear in mind my remarks at the talk page re unlocking the article. Mjroots (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 17:21, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Dover Strait coastal guns, 1940–1944[edit]

Did some cleaning up on the article and changed the title, thought you'd like to know. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 12:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@Keith-264: I already did! Face-smile.svg Mjroots (talk) 19:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I couldn't fill in the missing cites, sadly. Face-sad.svg Regards Keith-264 (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

2017 Westminster attack[edit]

Yes irrelevant, and that it's "standard practice" is a. not true and b. the worst possible argument. What is standard practice? Rutte's comment? Comments in general? Standard expressions of sympathy? You should know better than to insert comment that has no other justification than "being verified". I feel sorry too--perhaps you should add me to the list, or John. My Twitter account can verify. Drmies (talk) 18:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

@Drmies: - this is best discussed at talk:2017 Westminster attack so that other interested parties, such as Coffee can give their opinions. Mjroots (talk) 18:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Mjroots, I've seen a thousand such discussions, where typically the anti-NOTNEWS editors, who seem to have little better to do, outshout everyone else. Best to nip this unencyclopedic drivel in the bud. Drmies (talk) 18:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict)*tumbles into the page* - Ah, yes. Well Drmies, there's two reasons I see for keeping it there right now: 1. Some new good faith editors added those, and since they're decently referenced for now I don't see any real harm in keeping it there. 2. Other articles already do this, i.e. 2016 Nice attack#International. Now of course I say these points with the caveat that what's currently on the page can and should be shortened down to a sentence, like the first sentence here, once enough reactions are made. Coffee // have a cup // beans // 18:48, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Actually, Coffee, I added the Dutch reaction. Been a long time since I was called "new" on Wikipedia Face-wink.svg. Mjroots (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Pardon me, I meant the other one and edits I believe that occured to it and to the bit you added (or perhaps just the flag icon was added to yours I can't remember). Coffee // have a cup // beans // 19:03, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

BoJo Grenfell[edit]

Hi Mjroots.

I noticed you added info] re BoJo, to Grenfell Tower fire. The info. you added has since been removed due to concerns re relevance.

However, maybe it's relevant to be included in London_Fire_Brigade#Staffing?

Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 11:43, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Trafford09: Thanks for the notice. If you feel that it is appropriate in the article, feel free to add it there. Mjroots (talk) 12:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Grenfell Tower and the use of the word martyr[edit]

Hi, thanks for inviting me to discuss my edit. My understanding of the word martyr is someone who chooses to die for a cause, but nobody chose to die in that fire. What are your definitions? (Huddsblue (talk) 06:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC))

@Huddsblue: - in the context given, I was thinking of the definition 3 at wikt:martyr - One who suffers greatly and/or constantly, even involuntarily. Mjroots (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi and thanks. That's not quite applicable to the victims of the fire though. They just died in a very tragic accident, they didn't 'martyr on', as the prepositional third version of the word suggests they did, (which is another way of saying 'soldiering on'). I strongly believe that martyr is the wrong word to use in these circumstances, as they didn't voluntarily die for a cause. Thoughts? Huddsblue (talk) 08:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
@Huddsblue: It is not a word that has been used by a Wikipedia editor, but by a journalist who is being directly quoted. I would say that the definition quoted above fits, due to the and/or clause. The victims "suffered greatly, and involuntarily". If you are still unhappy with the word being used, then I would suggest that the issue is raised at the article talk page, and this thread is copied over. Mjroots (talk) 08:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Let's just leave it. Huddsblue (talk) 02:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Category:Category talk:2 ft gauge railways has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Category talk:2 ft gauge railways, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Class 377 at Eastbourne[edit]

Are you still after a reliable source for the fire damaged 377 at Eastbourne, or has that been put to bed? The joy of all things (talk) 18:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@The joy of all things: Yes, a RS is still needed. If you can do this, please edit the article and add the incident. Mjroots (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Done. It's scant on information (i.e. it mentions damage to one coach, but doesn't say which coach), but it does say which unit it is (377442). Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 18:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 01:21, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident[edit]

34067 Tangmere, west of Bath.jpg Congratulations, it's a...
...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 14:51, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Proper order at topic?...[edit]

I placed the 2015 Wootton SPAD incident within Rail transport at its proper WP:GA topic but wasn't completely sure where it should be placed... It's after the "1996 Silver Spring, Maryland collision" and before the "7 Subway Extension". Please take a look at to make sure I put it in the correct order. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident[edit]

The article 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 15:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


Michael, since you're familiar with this line, maybe you can check the photo & description I added at Kent and East Sussex Railway#The line today and see if it's plausible. I may have misremembered where on the line I took this shot, and I'm not sure what to call those dudes. Dicklyon (talk) 07:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: I'm pretty sure it's Rolvenden. Chap on left would appear to be a passenger, chap in uniform is the guard. Mjroots (talk) 08:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, thanks; searching my archives for Rolvenden I found a report on our trip that says "Most of the group decided to travel back to Tenterden on the 14.17 train; many alighted at Rolvenden to visit the loco repair shops, whilst the rest of the tired and weary party went on to Tenterden..." The guy up close has a badge that says "Ticket Inspector", which I guess is what "guard" is. The other has the same uniform, I'm pretty sure, but maybe a different role. Do I recall right that they staff these trains with volunteers? Dicklyon (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I have more from that trip online, including a few in the loco works at Rolvenden, at pbase. I had sort of forgotten about going through such old galleries that predate my serious wikipedia involvement. Maybe the one inside the train, with photographers pointing their cameras at each other would be good, for showing what the train is like? Or is this too ordinary/personal to be a good illustration for that line? Or the Station Master photo? Dicklyon (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
You are free to upload images to Commons. Whether or not they get used is another matter. Mjroots (talk) 19:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
The loco is a Class 33. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Drafting an RFC on narrow-gauge railway titles[edit]

See my draft at User:Dicklyon/rfc#RfC: Hyphen in titles of articles on railways of a narrow gauge. I invite anyone who wants to help make it a neutral question and productive discussion to make tweaks there, or make suggestions, or start your own alternative proposal. Thanks. Dicklyon (talk) 01:55, 2 February 2017 (UTC)


Looks like you've got the wrong ref in this edit? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Paragraph 110, 3rd bullet point. Mjroots (talk) 11:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
I've added "|at=para 110" to the ref, in case other folk are as confused as I was. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Class 47[edit]

Hi. You've changed much of this article to put a space in between the class designation and the fleet number (i.e. "47 001") but they were never classed as such by BR - if you look at TOPS readouts they were simply five figure numbers (47001). I realise that the works did usually leave something of a space there on the sides of the locos originally, but not always ([3],[4]) and by the later days they didn't bother (i.e. [5], [6]). Regardless, you haven't changed all of them, so we need some consistency, I would say? Black Kite (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Black Kite: BR practice was that locomotive classes had a space after the class number. 47 001 was a locomotive, whereas 47001 could be a carriage number. The preserved Hastings Unit had a carriage number changed to prevent confusion with a Class 60 locomotive. Point taken re consistency, but the omission to the dreamt number is deliberate. This could be in quote marks for clarity. Mjroots (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Yep - when rolling stock was introduced into the TOPS system in the early 80s, it wasn't allowed that a carriage and locomotive number could be identical, which is why a number of DMU/EMU vehicles and carriages were renumbered (for example the 56xxx DMU vehicles were switched to 53xxx). But yeah, we need consistency throughout the various articles. My tendency would be to drop the space, but I don't really mind as long as each article is internally consistent. Black Kite (talk) 20:45, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
@Black Kite: - I've changed them all to use a non-breaking space. Mjroots (talk) 21:19, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
No, 56xxx DMU cars became 54xxx; it was the 50xxx which became 53xxx. For some reason, leading zeros were significant: TOPS was apparently able to distinguish the loco 03 063 from coach 3063 without either needing to be renumbered. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Whoops, yes you're right. And yes, the leading zeros were significant because TOPS treated the numbers as character strings rather than integers. I remember trying to run a class 86 locomotive (can't remember what, but let's say 86999) through an E31 request one night and typing it in as 06999... and the system throwing it out despite 6999 existing as a valid coaching stock number. Black Kite (talk) 23:05, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Saint Petersburg Metro bombing articles[edit]

I noticed that the other article was created later but it also has the most info so far. If you want to keep it some info should be moved.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

River Len[edit]

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)

Mill symbols[edit]

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)

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)


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

Medway diagram[edit]

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)


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)

Template:River Waveney map[edit]

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)

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)

Givors canal[edit]

Hi, given your interest in France and transport and the fact that it's been sitting weeks, I wondered if you'd care to review this one for GA? If you;re not feeling very well I understand though, sorry to hear about that. Your talk page could do with archiving though its 159 kb! Hope you had a good Christmas!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:47, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Bristol Packet (1801 ship)[edit]

Thanks for your edits & comment about Bristol Packet (1801 ship) I have added a (historic England) ref for the length, but I can't find where I got the figure for the width.— Rod talk 08:50, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

EIC ships[edit]

Hi Mjroots, I am aware of the site you mentioned, but there is nothing in it that isn't in either Hackman's (2001) book on the EIC ships, or in the National Archives, which provides part of the base for both the website and Hackman. Furthermore, I have often found them incomplete, or even wrong, which compromises info based on them. As for the EIC flags, I use them generally, but there was a point in the early 19th century when the EIC switched to the regular British ensign. At one point I had the year, but I've mislaid the reference. I now generally use 1814 as the cut-off for switching because that was the year the EIC lost its monopoly on the east of Cape of Good Hope trade. This gives rise to an additional issue: a vessel may be sailing east of the Cape of Good Hope, but without being a vessel belonging to the EIC. It might be under contract (an "extra ship", even for as many as six voyages), or after 1814, licensed, or under a special exemption. Thus convict transports to Australia might backhaul for the EIC, or whalers go into the South Pacific, or in one case, be carrying missionaries to the South Pacific, and although in the first and third of these categories, their logbooks may be in the National Archives in the EIC section, they were not EIC ships. (And sometimes EIC ships became licensed ships.) So often what flag to feature is a bit of a judgement call based on my best guess as to what was going on at the time. I would welcome any info that you might have on when the changeover in flags occurred, or anything that in particular cases would provide more accurate info. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 20:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin: IMHO, contemporary sources are best. Do you have access to The Times online? That's the sort of thing they would have covered. Mjroots (talk) 21:25, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Mjroots, Sorry, am not following you. As far as the website you recommended is concerned, it is using the same sources I use, except that I update the info with other info that is contemporary to the period, or contemporary in the sense of recent, especially when it is reflects some historian's detailed research. Both contemporaries have their weaknesses; I tend to go with the preponderance of the evidence. If you mean with respect to the flag issue, I don't have access to The Times. There may have been an announcement, but I am not aware of it. One source I have started to think about is paintings. A painter painting an EIC ship in 1820, for instance, will paint the then relevant flag. That may solve the switch-over date, but it still doesn't solve the problem of what flag a non-EIC ship is flying. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@Acad Ronin: - I meant that The Times would likely have covered the EIC losing its monopoly. I get my access to the online archive through my library's website. As you appear to be in the United States, it is a possibility that you could get access that way. Otherwise, it is a question of paying for access directly through The Times. Mjroots (talk) 21:55, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Re HMS Pearl (1762)[edit]

Hi Mjroots, thought you might be able to give me some advice as an admin who has an interest in the subject matter. I am working on HMS Pearl (1762) in my user space. I am not quite ready to move the article yet but the move will be complicated by a redirect which is currently occupying the title page. I could simply cut and paste the finished article over the redirect but I assume this will result in loss of the edit history (whether that matters or not, I don't know) or I could request the current page is deleted and then move my article to the user space. Is there any guidance on this or do you have an opinion on what's best? As I said, it is still a work in progress so doesn't need moving yet but would like to know in advance. Best regards--Ykraps (talk) 09:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ykraps: As you're the only editor who has edited the proto-article all you need to do is edit the redirect by cutting and pasting the proto-article in. Use an edit summary of "convert to article" or similar. Mjroots (talk) 09:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Okay, thanks--Ykraps (talk) 09:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
@Ykraps: Should the situation change, ping me when you are ready to move the proto-article and I'll G6 the redirect for you. Mjroots (talk) 09:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
By which you mean, if others edit the proto-article? Incidentally, have I posted this at the right place? I've just noticed at the top of the page where it says, "If your post is an Admin-related matter..."--Ykraps (talk) 10:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Ykraps - yes, and don't worry about it. This is not an admin matter as such, but the post could have gone in the Ships section. I'm almost finished with a major project then this talk page will be sorted out and archived. Mjroots (talk) 10:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Ah okay, thanks. I'm not sure what is and isn't an admin thing as I don't seem to get involved with too many. I consider that a good thing. Regards--Ykraps (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Speedwell (ship)[edit]

There's a discussion at Talk:Speedwell (ship) that might interest you Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

SS Brita (1908) question[edit]

I've left a question on the talkpage of SS Brita (1908), which you created regarding the ship's build date.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:06, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Notability of ships[edit]

Hi Mjroots, I noticed your recent great work on this list, and I see that you wikilinked all of the ships. I recently wrote a couple of articles about ships, including a ship from this list, and I'm wondering what's the standard view on notability of ships? (Couldn't find anything in the rules.) For example, if the following is available from reliable sources, is the ship notable?

  1. Launch date, ship's maker.
  2. Ship's fate
  3. Successive owners
  4. Successive captains
  5. Ship's type
  6. Tonnage, Length, Beam

Was an individual 19th century ship ever determined to be not notable? Thanks, 凰兰时罗 (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

@凰兰时罗: Generally, ships over 100 tons (undefined) / 100 ft long should be notable. If you have all the info you state above from reliable sources, then you should be able to write a decent enough article which will demonstrate the notability of the ship. I'd say that most ships from the mid-C19th are going to be notable enough for an article. For older vessels, it's very much a case-by-case basis. The stranger the name, the easier it will be to find souces and demonstrate notability. Naval vessels are easier than merchant vessels. Mjroots (talk) 19:58, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! That's good to know. 凰兰时罗 (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


Hello. Do you think that this adds too many words? I see that while many entries are fairly short, a few have a bit more detail. I thought this was a candidate (the BOT's cause of the accident) for adding a touch more, or maybe the fact that she sank very quickly about ten minutes after disembarking the pilots. What do you think? Cheers DBaK (talk) 22:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered: - I'd lose the "and stowed" bit. Mjroots (talk) 05:28, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 Done - Done it, thanks - reads much better. Cheers DBaK (talk) 07:29, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

USS Texas (BB-35)[edit]

Why did you add a Navbox for the 2017 incident but not for the 2010 and 2012? Either none or all makes more sense. Pennsy22 (talk) 08:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Pennsy22: navboxes and cats added. Mjroots (talk) 09:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

ACX Crystal[edit]

Thanks MJR for your message, but cannot see where I have left out a ref. Davidships (talk) 17:04, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Ah yes. Must have lost during busy time with multiple edit conflicts - restored it now as still needed for a couple of details in that sentence.
Incidentally, do you think that the chart is legit? Firstly it is clearly from, yet claimed as "own work"; secondly it looks like a straight lift from the attributed version used by the BBC here. A version produced independently later would be different as the same historic track would be overlaid on the map showing current ships at that time. Davidships (talk) 23:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

On a different aspect, I am surprised that you moved the page from ACX Crystal to MV ACX Crystal "Per naming convention for ship articles". WP:SHIPNAME doesn't say that at all. "An article about a ship not known to have a prefix should use only the ship's name". A Google News search for "mv acx crystal" produced just one RS in English - apart from that, virtually all of the tens of thousands use the unadorned name. Davidships (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Re: 2010 F1 season/Hamilton[edit]

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)

I know, but I was just trying to trim some of the page size by removing the refnames of references that did not have another reference point in the article, as in the only mentioning of the reference. Bad idea in hindsight, but just trying to trim every little unnecessary byte off the page. Regards. Cs-wolves(talk) 17:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Already responded there! Cs-wolves(talk) 18:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I also believe the ref name tags give unnecessary weight to the article.  Kitchen Roll  (Exchange words) 18:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton[edit]

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)

Flags for F1 race[edit]

You undid my edit on the 2010 European Grand Prix because I changed the flag to European one from Spanish one. I think it is better to put the European one, because it is officially named the European Grand Prix. Of course, there is a Spanish Grand Prix, but all other races have their respective flags, bar this one. M-R-Schumacher (talk) 14:55, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, seen it. Also, thank you for putting my edit as a good faith edit, and not vandalism - because I just edited it thinking that the European flag was the correct one. M-R-Schumacher (talk) 17:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, you are quite correct about everyone learning about Wiki (but I guess everyone will be learning about it until they reitre, and the site does need admins :P). And, I am also trying to fight vandalism, so it would have been quite ironic if I were accused of it! M-R-Schumacher (talk) 17:26, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject Water Sports[edit]

Hi Mjroots

I thought you might be interested in joining this new project Wikipedia:WikiProject Water sports/RNLI task force, as you have contributed to articles concerning Lifeboats and shipping  stavros1  ♣ 

2011 Australian Grand Prix[edit]

Please do not include blank pre-set sections. A wikipedia article should be ready to be read with whatever information is current at any point in its life. If you are going to 'set up' articles for future expansion, use hides to remove the blank headings from view of those who step into the article for a look prior to its expansion. Just a touch of professional presentation. --Falcadore (talk) 07:59, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

2013 Formula One season[edit]

Hi, Mj,

I've come to you before with a couple of requests, and I'm hoping you can help me out with another one. A few recent developments have lead regular contributors over at WP:F1 to belive that it is time to create a page for the 2013 Formula One season. However, the page has been pre-emptively created half a dozen times in the past, and admins have prevented the page from being created until it is unlocked; we are 18 months away from the start of the 2013 season, and by comparison, the 2012 page was created almost three years in advance. I am hoping you will be able to open up the ability to create the 2013 page, or at least direct me to someone who can if you do not have that happy power, please. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 06:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've changed the salting on the page from create=sysop to create=autoconfirmed, that should let you get to work on it, I think. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 07:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
That's fine, Bushranger. Not too soon to create the article now, considering there are drivers with contracts to race in 2013. Mjroots (talk) 07:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Folkestone Racecourse[edit]

Thanks for the message. I'd say its "closing" rather than "closed". The racecourse's own website shows that they still have fixtures left in 2012 and the news story on the Racing Post says it will close at the end of 2012, so I'd say for the moment it should still be marked as an active racecourse until it finally shuts it doors. What do you think?--Bcp67 (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Stoffel Vandoorne[edit]

Sorry about edit warring on the Stoffel Vandoorne article. I just wanted there to be a photo from 2016, because Stoffel looks way younger than he does now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArgiargiargiFFF (talkcontribs) 20:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton (Opening paragraph)[edit]

(Relatively inexperienced Wikipedia user here). I'm having issues with Lobo151, which has descended into edit warring. I was wondering if you could provide some expertise on the manner, thanks. Formulaonewiki (talk) 19:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@Formulaonewiki: am aware of the issue, said editor has been given a 3RR warning so is liable to be blocked should he persist. There's a discussion at talk:Lewis Hamilton re the issue in question. Feel free to contribute there. Mjroots (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
@Mjroots: Thank you, will do. Formulaonewiki (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: My editing[edit]

Earlier discussions are archived here

Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of shipwrecks in 1837 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Altona and St Andrews Bay
List of shipwrecks in 1836 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Caernarvon

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of shipwrecks in 1837, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Onega (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited MS Sea Wind, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Svea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of shipwrecks in 1837, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Fort William and Hamburgh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of shipwrecks in 1837 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Sunderland and Flores Island
List of shipwrecks in 2017 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Talisay City

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

John Noakes[edit]

According to sources he died yesterday on the 28th, and there's already a section below. Aiken D 10:19, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

@Aiken drum: - Oops! Didn't spot that. Sort out the referencing and I'll be happy to support. Mjroots (talk) 10:33, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Grenfell Tower fire[edit]

I find the fact the you just notified yourself of your own ITN to be highly amusing. Thanks for putting a smile on my face. :) Sario528 (talk) 13:15, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sario528: If you want a job done properly... Mjroots (talk) 13:16, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Do never inline REFs![edit]

In Grenfell Tower fire you degraded the proper REF in the references section to an inline REF. This mass of inline REFs makes editing of the article a PITA. It is practically impossible to do the way you worsened the situation. Don't do that ever again! --L.Willms (talk) 15:45, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@L.Willms: - if it was you who added that style of referencing to an already established system, then it is you that needs to never do that again. I merely made that ref conform with the existing system, which has been in use since the very beginning of the article. It's not a PITA, give the ref a name (I tend to use the name of the source and its indiviual reference number) and re-use that name whenever quoting from that ref. Mjroots (talk) 16:06, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, changing from established style (inline refs) to another style (WP:LDR) is against WP:CITEVAR. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Re: Other users[edit]

Earlier discussions are archived here

Your advice being followed[edit]

Mjroots, Would you mind checking this [7], who quickly turned into this[8].

According to what he stated above, Jezebel's Ponyo will not be surprised. The farm is turning into a colony.

Best regards, --Blue Indigo (talk) 05:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@BlueIndigo: Are you saying that PirateGreen is another sock of Aubmn? Mjroots (talk) 06:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Exactly. I knew it was coming & was not surprised when I saw first revert by *saviourblue*, who then turned into a *green pirate*.
--Blue Indigo (talk) 06:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC).
@BlueIndigo: OK, file a sockpuppet report at WP:SPI with Aubmn as the puppetmaster. Add in all names that you suspect are socks. Mjroots (talk) 06:27, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Aidepikiwnirotide and IP aspersions[edit]

I'm fairly sure you'll just have ignored Aidepikiwnirotide's recent thinly-veiled accusations that either myself of Vormeph have been using IPs to influence yourself or Moxy. Just in case, it seems likely that both IPs (as well as HeroChaos) are Olowe2011, who had a ragequit moment and was renamed 1xdd0ufhgnlsoprfgd. Not that explains why he would be raging against you, given how he probably feels about me, but I suppose he's not overly happy with WP authorities at the moment.

Normally I'd keep quiet about a New Start, but HeroChaos is not going to be long for WP if his talkpage is anything to go by. Bromley86 (talk) 20:37, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Bromley86 Just please don't change/remove my opinions on talk page. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 22:23, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Dear Mjroots, users Bromley86 and Vormeph several times changed/removed my comments on talk page and voted from my side. I would appreciate if you would prevent such behaviours. Thanks. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

I too would welcome some input. My initial edit may have been incorrect, as I did blank his discussion in a proposal section; I should have instead handled it as you did when he ignored a request not to discuss in the earlier proposal. However, Vormeph has done noting wrong re. Aidepikiwnirotide's comments, as he's just moved them to a Comments section below the proposal vote.
Both of us included Aidepikiwnirotide as an Oppose vote. That seems to accurately state his position on the subject. No problem if he wants to abstain though.
I'll have one more attempt at tidying it up, following Vormeph's inclusion of a Comments section. Hopefully Aidepikiwnirotide will not continue to disrupt. Bromley86 (talk) 22:49, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

not too much damage[edit]

just have to make allowances for extra bits that seem somewhat enthusiastic or naive, and for what I consider some beyond the scope of the relevant projects, in most cases no real harm, just misleading JarrahTree 11:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

It was more a case of, FYI - and the explanation - than any specific example, more of a heads up of what to see and expect JarrahTree

Thanks for notifying me[edit]

Thank you infact for telling me that I should link my signature to user page. (Cass)

@Cassini127: thank you for fixing it. Mjroots (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


Earlier discussions are archived here

Happy New Year, Mjroots![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

A Dobos torte for you![edit]

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 17:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen, thanks but I can't eat it. Allergic to chocolate you see. Maybe swap it for a nice cream cake? Mjroots (talk) 17:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Mjroots, you can notify 7&6=thirteen but you need to be careful to explicitly number the parameter, like this - {{reply to|1=7&6=thirteen}}@7&6=thirteen: --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:38, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, but I think he's probably one of my TPS's anyway. Mjroots (talk) 05:14, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg Thanks! I would have added but like I said, did we need any or all. Pennsy22 (talk) 10:32, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Message for TPSs[edit]

OK, don't panic if you don't see me about for a day or two. Last night's thunderstorm has knocked out the internet side of my router, so I have no internet at home until a replacement is supplied. Mjroots (talk) 14:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

New router has arrived, normal service about to resume. Mjroots (talk) 11:37, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

New messages[edit]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Tring user/Sandbox[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Tring user/Sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:56, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, it's on the wrong talk page as you merely copy pasted trying to help the creator out. I'd already deleted the content form a previous iteration. Cheers, Dlohcierekim (talk) 06:16, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017[edit]


News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

added Happyme22Dragons flight
removed Zad68

Guideline and policy news

Technical news


  • A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
  • A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
  • Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)


I am involved with the setting up of this project group- WP:SHUK but feel I lack many of the essential skills, I did most of the leg work C&Ping from WP:MILLS. When internet is restored, could you look over at it, and give any wisdom and advice.--ClemRutter (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Amtrak[edit]

I'm not going to make a big deal out of it, but I consider Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Amtrak borderline canvassing. It's less than neutral to say that you "reverted a major change", when it was to material that you yourself introduced less than a month ago. Mackensen (talk) 17:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@Mackensen: - I'm sorry that you see it that way, as it was not my intention. I was merely stating the situation. You made a major change, I reverted it for reasons given. Will address your comments at the talk page. Mjroots (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2017 (UTC)