Hello, Mr Stephen/Archive 5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! DVD+ R/W 23:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was told that i edited a 'clone CD' page, putting bad language and insults in it. But i didn't edit that page because i've never even been there. This isn't the first time that i have been falsely accused of editing a page with profanities and insults. I do understand that youre trying to keep Wikipedia "clean", its just annoying being accused of something i havn't done. Do you have any idea of how some one else could of edited wikipedia themselves, but make it appear to you that I have done it? if you do i would much appreciate a response.
ben_alternative_f1@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.143.38 (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You probably have a dynamic or shared IP. Your best bet is to get an account. Mr Stephen 07:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May seem like old news now, but Manchester was recently listed as a good article, try and make as much effort as you can with trying to make it featured.
Manchester Airport has seen unprecedented vandalism from anonymous editors recently, on 24th September it was protected by MastCell for a period of 1 week. Make sure to visit the page (after that date) regularly so we can stamp out any "bad edits".
Try to invite more members to this project. As much as a streamlined team is good, the more editors we have the broader the range we can cover.
Onnaghartalk ! ctrb ! er 16:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)If you wish not to receive this monthly distribution please put two * by your username on the project mainpage[reply]
It is not adverts... Stop spoiling the site and stop changing info! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.58.191 (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The project now has 28 members! 7 new participants enrolled this week, they can be viewed here. There was also change to the welcoming messages this month, by Jza84, which reinvigorated the style in response to the change of colours on the main and affiliated pages. See the welcome templates, here. Finally, a barnstar has been created for the project! See the final design on this page, and so far it has been awarded to one lucky participants, WebHamster. Well done.
Greater Manchester Article News
Well has this month been a hub of activity, or what? (See:Original diff) The new assessment scale has been welcomed by many here at WPGM and as of 4th November, 81.37% of all 650 articles have been assessed with both importance and class. Two articles have been passed good article criteria since last delivery, they are: Didsbury & Dunham Massey. Well done to all involved.
Current Debates
There was a lengthy debate over a certain number of related articles in Manchester City Centre this week, (See:the thread involved). Aytoun Street, Barton Square, Brazenoose Sqaure, Dover Street, Manchester and Police Street were all flagged by Pit-yacker as being deserved of deletion per lacking notablilty. The process took 5 days at articles for deletion and the result was, delete. Other sections that readied editors into scrambling over themselves this month were: should Greater Manchester boroughs get their own infobox? Such as with London boroughs. The debate continutes.
Monthly Challenges
Same as last month, we've have to get Manchester upto Featured Article Standard. However, with Manchester now rated as A-Class (above GA and below FA) it may be easier than first thought. Try to fill all the current "to do" requirements. There has also been some talk of increased activity of bringing Greater Manchester to Good Article Standard. It would be ideal if all 650 articles were at least GA standard, but that will never happen in the next month. But please if you can, assess your ability to understand an article and if you're acquauinted with the task in hand and potentially long wait for a writing and for a review, go ahead! Be bold.
Manchester Airport once again saw more vandal edits this month, and was protected for another consecutive month on 22nd October by Jmlk17. Some users have also realised the extreme coincidence in the first half of 65% of editing IPs, i.e. all begin with "79.72". Could it be the same editor? If you can keep visiting the page to revert vandalism in sight. The most freqeunt additions that are factually incorrect are the inclusions of: Chicago O'Hare and New York-JFK to Pakistan International Airlines (T2) and Newquay to Air Southwest (T3). MAN also has a peer review.
Although you may not have noticed that this WikiProject has a associated portal. The page named, Portal:North West England, is updated frequently, but it would be nice to get more editors. It too has recently undergone a peer review, and some criteria has been added to get the page to featured portal status. You could signify your involvement by adding {{User Portal NWE}} to your userpage.
Hello again Mr. Stephen! Firstly, I'm hoping you understand what the word "Skriking" means and you're familliar with it!.... I read on a wiki-article some time ago that the local word "Skriking" is of Old Norse origin (still intelligable in modern Danish language) meaning "crying loudly" that is prevailent in Oldham and Stockport because of their Danelaw origins... apparently.
I'm trying to locate that article, that phrase, and see if there's a source. It sure was in one of the Stockport related articles and not sure if you know of it??? - I know you're the one to ask though! It'd be a great bite of infomation to add to the Oldham article for it's FAC. No problem if you can't help, I won't be skriking too loud! -- Jza84· (talk) 14:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The project now has 31 members. 3 new participants enrolled last month, they can be viewed here. Andrew has also created another template for your talk page (even though this links to your userpage) which displays for all to see that you are a member of the project. You can add it to your page by including {{WPGM Talk}} to the page. It may be difficult to see the true effects of these welcoming messages, but I'm estimating that since the introduction of these that 12 new users have joined, all 100% have accepted their invitations, and therefore they are 100% successful in their aim.
Greater Manchester Article News
Once again, the project has been subject to much praise from three newly promoted featured articles, and one more good article. Oldham (nom), Manchester (nom), M62 motorway (nom) and Chat Moss (review) have all passed with flying colours. Featured articles now make up 0.03% more of the overall articles that there are relating to the project, than last month. Of all 791 pages which are tagged with this template, 100% have been assessed with the new scale which was introduced last month. It may also be worth noting two others pages that are undergoing transformations are: List of companies based in Greater Manchester and Belle Vue Zoo.
Current Debates
There was a lengthy debate over Manchester Airport this month, which lead to three article for deletions, second nominations viewable here and deletion review viewable here. Basically, what happened was there was quite a great misunderstanding of what the purpose of the lists actually were. They were to compile a list of the destinations served by each terminal and linked along into a sub-page, where it would seem the overview page (i.e. Manchester Airport) would look less cluttered, as was the suggestion at the peer review. Some participants at the first AFD, stated that reviews shouldn't be carried out upon unless there is consensus, and as they are not authorative should only be used as a guide. It was soon sorted though and all three daughter-lists were deleted. There has also been a change to the projects aims, which took a dramatic overhaul this week following the FA pass of Manchester. The change was performed by Jza84. It is now recognised that we should bring not only top importance articles to FA standard but also ones that have been long-since reviewed, like Altrincham and Stretford. And if you're wondering why Salford is there it's due to the fact that there is a consensus among the project members that as Salford is in such close vicinity to the City of Manchester, that it's our "duty" to help promote it. The change came about about after this discussion.
Monthly Challenges
New this month, we have to get Greater Manchester upto Featured Article Standard. However, with Manchester now rated as FA-Class and the proposed "skipping" of the GA process, it may not be too long before we see this under the success section on the project mainpage. It would be ideal if all 791 articles were at least GA standard, but that will never happen in the next month! But please if you can, assess your ability to understand an article and if you're acquauinted with the task in hand and potentially long wait for a writing and for a review, go ahead! Be bold. The progress monitor can be seen here.
Once again, Portal:North West England has been subject to much exposure on behalf of it's editors. The current status of the portal is looking good and it has so far gained unanimous support at it's FPOC. Hopefully, it'll be promoted and we'll have yet another success on our hands. Also, most major articles that are relevant have been tagged with a shortcut to the Portal mainpage, by Jza.
And finally, have a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Delivered on December 3rd, 2007 by Rudget. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
Thanks for pointing that out! It's since been removed. I really should have proof-read it, even though I did.... :) — Rudgetcontributions 20:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I did a search for '"William Astle" journalist' and didn't get anything that made it look like he was a notable journalist whereas '"William Astle" Stockport' makes it very clear. JMiall₰ 12:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Happy New Year to all our Greater Manchester Wikipedians! The project now has 34 members. 5 new participants enrolled last month, they can be viewed here. On behalf of the team I hope they have prosperous and enjoyable usership and wish them well with their forthcoming work!
User:Archtransit and User:Rudget, both part of our team, are current candidates for adminship (see here for Archtransit and here for Rudget). We wish them luck with this persuit and hope they will become our latest project participants with admin status!
Simillarly, the Portal:North West England is now officially a featured portal. User:Rudget has been overwhelmingly involved with this portal and he too is hereby thanked on behalf of the project for his continued contributions to this page and many others.
There have been a number of debates this month, some of which with a high level of potential impact for the project and its members.
Article assessment for the project became a point of contention when around 1400 articles were tagged by a bot. Most of these artcles were on "minor" association football players. The consensus was that in our state of around 30 participants and as a predominatly geography based project, most of these articles should be untagged, at very least for the time being. Of our 1403 articles now tagged however, only (?) 85% are assessed - a drop of 15%!
Perhaps one of the most notable debates this month was the possibility of... scrapping the project newsletter! User:Rudget has written the last three editions (that's all of them!) and has decided that he'd like to pass on the responsibility. It has been proposed that a noticeboard system be introduced to highlight new issues in a near(!)-realtime fashion. I User:Jza84 am writing what could now be the last GM newsletter for a while. If you're a member of the team, but aren't closely involved with the project, then we'd love to hear from you at WT:GM with your views on which system of communication is the right way forwards (if any/both!).
Monthly Challenges
As was stated in last months newsletter, the Greater Manchester remains a key article for the project, and one which has been identified as urgent in our quest for Featured Article status. Sadly, for all our other successes, Greater Manchester has changed little since this time last year] (!) and is still an article requiring expansion and development. The new WP:UKCOUNTIES guide may provide new ways in which to channel our efforts. Although we endevour to have good article status even for our suburbs and hamlets, other articles specifically identified as needing development towards FA include Salford, Stretford and Altrincham.
Many of our most crucial articles about our largest towns are still in poor condition: Rochdale, Bury, Prestwich, Bolton, and Wigan are of "start class" standard - much lower than we should have. If you feel you can help, please be bold and try to improve these.
One final challenge for this month is for all those with new digial cameras for Christmas, or even digial images stored away on a disc!... many of our place articles are still without a single photograph, and www.geograph.org.uk is running low on quality images. Even those with photographs often have a low quality photograph of the local church. MORE ARE NEEDED! Especially townscapes! If you think you can help, a barnstar is up for grabs for best picture added in the next month or so!
We're always looking for potential new project members and ways for greater communication, collaboration and participation. WP:GM has a strong core of users, but would like to have more input from a wider user-base. If you can think of ways to improve our ways of working, please feel free to mention them at WT:GM. Simillarly, if you notice a new or unapproached user who is producing sound work related to Greater Manchester and its consituent parts, please don't forget to ask them if they'd like to join us, either in your own hand, or by adding {{Welcome WPGM}} to their talk page.
Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!
Mr. Stephen: I have not made ANY edits to anything in Wikipedia, including the entry on Venezuela. You've got the wrong girl. I have also not saved any test edits. I go to Wikipedia only occasionally for information and research, but I NEVER edit anything. Just wanted to set the record straight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.43.220 (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant job on the Edgar Wood Centre. Almost a start class article right off the bat. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
excuse me but the info for nithin actor is incorrect but when i try to correct it u will not allow me so please fix it or ask me to fix it sorry for any inconvience thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katie321123 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I took a look at the article you started on St Thomas' Church, Stockport and was wondering if there was a construction date available? I think the date taken from Images of England for the Grade I listed buildings in Greater Manchester article is wrong and the page is pretty garbled anyway, so if you could provide a new date with an accurate source hat would be great. Thanks. Nev1 (talk) 00:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You recently removed the protection from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwick_Roell_Group ... please could you advise the best way to protect this page from the non registered user who keeps adding porn links and changing the text. It appears that this person has some personal vendetta against the company —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tombarnes101 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This barnstar is awarded for your efforts in helping Greater Manchester to achieve good article status. A great collaborative effort from some of the members of the Greater Manchester WikiProject. ┌Joshii┐└chat┘ 15:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since the January newsletter there has been an increase of 5 featured articles/lists, taking our total number of featured entries upto 16 17 (Trafford passed today!).
Although WP:GM leads the way in terms of featured content by a local British project, the Kent and Yorkshire WikiProjects are close to this total, with 11 and 14 featured entries respectively.
Following a somewhat frenzied collaboration at the start of March, and a nomination by User:Joshii, Greater Manchester was promoted to GA status. It's the first metropolitan county to obtain this recognition.
There has otherwise been a reduction in WP:GM nominations for GA status, something which the project has begun to discuss on the talk page.
Having completed all but one of our short term aims set last December, the project would like to look at developing new short term aims. Suggestions have been made here, but there is scope for flexibility. Do you have a entry you would like to see developed?
Two members have left the project however, each for rather different reasons:
Archtransit (talk·contribs) was an administrator, and project member, who was found to have been abusing his editting and sysop privliges. Following investigation, Archtransit was banned indefinately. A report in The Signpost is found here.
Rudget (talk·contribs), also an administrator, decided to leave the project. Reasons mentioned included the demands of admin duties taking over too much time. Rudget helped towards Didsbury's GA promotion, and Portal:North West England's FP promotion.
Thanks
This WikiProject, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
WP:GM is a great project, and is leading the way for local WikiProjects of the UK. However, though the project talk page is a hub of activity, it is regularly used by only a core of 5-6 editors, which isn't making the most of its potential. Indeed, a study, by the University of Minnesota found that "One-tenth of 1 percent of editors account for nearly half of Wikipedia's content value". We at WP:GM do not want to follow suit!
There are several editors who have, sadly, not editted since the turn of 2008, and others, which concentrate in areas other than Greater Manchester material (which is quite fine!).
The WikiProject Greater Manchester would like to know if YOU are still around, and if so, if you've like to be more involved, and, if not, why not and what can we do to get you involved and be a bigger part of the team?
Feel free to come by the project talk page and leave us a message on what you're working on and/or what you'd like to see improved. The project is only as strong as its members and we'd like to know if you're still active or if we can help you with your editting.
Images
A picture's worth a thousand words
In our last issue, a plea was made for more images to be submitted to Wikipedia/WikiCommons to improve the quality and context of our articles. Many of our Top priority articles are still lacking in quality images, if any!
www.geograph.org.uk is an online resource of photographs of places in the UK, which we can use. Www.flickr.com also has some images we are permitted to use. Do you have a digital camera however? Can you take photographs of townscapes and landmarks in your local area that can be used here? Middleton, Hulme and Rochdale all have examples of images in their lead that help give a sense of place and improve the context to our readers.
Simillarly, many of our most crucial articles about our largest towns are still in poor condition: Stockport, Bury, Prestwich, Bolton, and Wigan are of "start class" standard with short lead sections and unreferenced sections - a much lower standard than we should allow! If you feel you can help, please be bold and try to improve these. There is a list of resources that can help.
this article was a legitimate biography and also backs up the page on Armin Meiwes and explains further reasons for his imprisonment. i would be very grateful if you could put the page back on wikipedia. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petarraj (talk • contribs) 15:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No relevant google or newspaper hits. Almost certainly a hoax. Mr Stephen (talk) 15:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For welcoming me back. I probably wouldn't have bothered coming back if nobody had bothered with the Greater Manchester peer review. I do hate trolls, they wind me up and make me do silly things! ┌Joshii┐└chat┘ 18:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll second that; a very impressive effort that produced quite a nice little article in no time at all. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What an evening - an award, then seconded, then the list gets promoted! Thanks, both of you. Mr Stephen (talk) 12:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As an agreement between editors at Scotland seems ever more unlikely, some users have decided to contact mediation. However, mediation require the acceptance of all involved parties. Would you be willing to accept? Thanks for your compliance...--Cameron (t|p|c) 18:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Drachenfyre. I am posting here to avoid cluttering up an already cluttered page. I am well aware that different parts of the UK got different forms. The one I linked to (2001_Scotland_Household.pdf) is the Scottish one, and it doesn't have a box for nationality. It does have a box for ethicity. The BBC report you linked to does talk about nationality, bizzarrely, but an earlier BBC report here does not. The figures (27% of people in Scotland call themselves British) come from the General Household Survey, not the census. Where have you got the 73% number from? Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 15:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello Mr Stephen. When I first searched for information on Welsh/Scottish nationality it was via the BBC and the controversies surrounding the inclusion of a Welsh tickbox. I see your point regarding the BBC's useage of ethnicity and nationality interchangeably. This is continued by an artical the UK Office of National Statistics.... which has an artical entitled: Living in Britain;
National Identity:
Would you describe yourself as British? The artical stated:
People living in England are more likely to describe themselves as British (48 per cent) than those in Scotland (27 per cent) or Wales (35 per cent), according to Living in Britain, the report of the 2001 General Household Survey.
From this, it was a deduction of subtracting 27% from 100% to determine the remaining of Scotland's population identifying as Scottish.
Given that these are statistics given by the UK ONS I would image that they are reliable sources, the use by both the ONS and the BBC of nationality and ethnicity notwithstanding. Your thoughts?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 15:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I found another source (and I probably heard this from somewhere because of my earlier statement that it was over "85% Scottish nationality") The source is the Scottish Government website, specifically http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/06/22110457/05107
It states 88.09% identify as of Scottish 'ethnicity', while less then 8% identify as of white-British 'ethnicity.'♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 15:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Yes, I have seen that on the 'vision of Britain' site. However, I have never seen a copy of the order or a description of the order ie: who the 'order' was authorised by, purpose of the order etc. I would guess at it being a local government issue for an administrative purpose.
Colin80.193.161.89 (talk) 00:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True; my camera is a bit big to lug around normally, but if I manage to use it right it should be capable of taking really nice pictures... :) With the 18th century slum house, are you meaning looking south from the bridge at [1]? Presumably it's the building on the east side of the river, with a newer building to the north, and a building site to the south? Mike Peel (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I called around there yesterday evening; unfortunately the light wasn't the best, as the building faces East, so I may go back there and get some better photos at some point. The ones I took last night are displayed at commons:User:Mike Peel/Manchester#Old building on Princess Street. Mike Peel (talk) 11:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Peterloo Massacre was nominated for FAC on 6 April. So far it has received support for FAS but feel free join the discussion here.
The reduction of WP:GM GAs, mentioned in the last issue, has been tackled with Buckton Castle and Oasis (band) being passed on 9 March and Upper Brook Street Chapel, Manchester on 7 April. We now have 13 GAs due to hard work of our contributors. Well done!
WP:GM still is still the leading local British WikiProject. As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 6 on London and Yorkshire who have 15 FAs each. Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still lacking GAs and falls behind London by 6. This topic was at the front of the new aims discussion (here) and is an important issue for WP:GM.
As mentioned above, new aims have been decided. See the right hand column for more details.
Member News
There are now 44 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester! A warm welcome to the 5 new members that have joined us since March:
Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!
New Aims
The completion of all but one of the short term aims set last December resulted in a discussion on WT:GM to set new aims for the WikiProject. They are:
Obtain GA status for a third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs.
It took us four months to get our last aims completed, why not try and see if these can be done in less time than before! All input is welcome but if anyone has any books or photos etc specifically related to these topics, they would be extra-specially welcome.
But before rushing ahead with these new aims, let's not forget the one that got away last time: to obtain B -> GA status for Rochdale, Wigan, Bury, Bolton and Stockport. Most of these articles are in poor condition and in need of repair. Good quality images are urgently needed also. Let's make sure that this aim doesn't stay off our radar much longer.
Don't Forget...
Images! The shortage of good images was mentioned in the last issue and still hasn't been resolved! A good place to start would be the requested photographs category but please remember that there are many articles not within this category that have the same need in common.
Assessment "Assess and review all relevant articles for quality, importance and progress" is one of our mid-term aims. At the present moment, there are only 43 unassessed articles. This task could be completed well before the next newsletter is out.
Sure; I'll try to call around there sometime soon. In the meantime, Pit-yacker's uploaded one of his photos of the building, see Image:Manchester Opera House.jpg; maybe that could be used instead for a while? Mike Peel (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid I have not edited any pages or deleted blank pages - someone is using my IP to frame me - I know this for sure (because there is a personal war between me and this person) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.114.244 (talk) 20:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Peterloo Massacre article was promoted to FA on 12 April. One of our top priority articles, it had previously been only start class. The process began on 25th March and since then underwent over 700 edits before the end of April, with Jza84, Malleus Fatuarum, and Richerman making significant contributions to the rapid development of the article. Ddstretch and Mr Stephen also contributed to discussions on the article talk page.
Perhaps the most unusual event of April 2008 for the project has surrounded the Denshaw article. Denshaw is a village of about 500 people in Saddleworth, Oldham, which attracted media attention due to vandalism of the stub class article. Once this was brought to the project's attention, efforts were made to improve the article which led to a successful DYK? nomination and might even advance it to GA status with a bit more effort. In April there were over 19,000 visitors who saw the project in action. Contributors included Jza84, Ddstretch, Malleus Fatuarum, Hassocks5489, Nev1 and Mike Peel.
Also this month 5 articles featured on the DYK? section of the front page: Hulme Arch Bridge, Peterloo Massacre, Bolton and Leigh Railway, Barnes Hospital, Denshaw, and Platt Fields Park. This certainly puts into perspective one of the project's previous mid-term aims "feature on the Did you know? section with at least three articles related to Greater Manchester". If you've expanded an article 5 fold or started one with at least 1.5kb of prose in the past 5 days and it has an interesting and referenced fact don't hesitate to read the conditions of DYK? and nominate it here. It gets the project noticed!
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still leading local British WikiProjects. As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 7 on London and Yorkshire who have 15 Featured Articles each. Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still lacking GAs and falls behind London by 6 (we have 14, London 20). If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
Member News
There are 45 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. One new member has joined the project this month:
Kieran5676 on 30th April and is interested in south Manchester.
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A rather large "thank you" goes out to all the editors who edited article related to Greater Manchester, or who edit the project itself.
Obtain GA status for one third (1/3) of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs.
It took us four months to get our last aims completed, why not try and see if these can be done in less time than before! All input is welcome but if anyone has any books or photos etc specifically related to these topics, they would be extra-specially welcome.
Most of the articles covered by our new aims haven't experienced much activity in the past month, if you thing you can help improve an article be bold and get editing. Articles such as List of people from Bolton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process.
Our highest priority article is of course Greater Manchester, there is a peer review from March with issues still to be addressed before it can be put forward as a featured article candidate. Salford is another top priority article because it's the county's second city; it's under gone a lot of editing but still has a way to go before it reaches GA. Also active this month has been the City of Salford article – part of our aim to get 1/3 of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs to GA &ndash.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Reminders...
Images! The rate of good images has gone up since it was mentioned in the last issue, but more images are needed! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment When this section was written, there was only 1 unassessed article! This task has probably already been finished, but it might now have. To check click here.
Firstly I had not read the rules regarding this web sit
I would like to know why one company is allow to advertise on the Glenorchy site though, Glenorchy Air is a small private company and it has it's links on this page of this site it is making money through this site why not others who serve this township?
Hello! Many thanks for reversing the vandalism on the Wiki page of Andrea Ross. You are a true Internet hero!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wnross (talk • contribs) 14:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Mr Stephen/Archive 5! I'd like to leave a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully today (and to my surprise) with 83 supports, 4 opposes, and 2 neutral.
What I have taken back from my RFA is that I've perhaps been too robust in debate and I will endevour to improve upon that aspect of my usership. I would like to thank you again and state here that I will not let any of my fellow Wikipedian's down. Thanks again! --Jza84 | Talk 11:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i was redirecting SBD tothe airport San Bernardino Int'l Airport but i was making the dimalished or something like that page so it would help like in LAX write back plz Salcan (talk) 23:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SO should i redo my edits to sbd and write a little summery? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salcan (talk • contribs) 23:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, hope you can help. I created this new page BUT eaton is in lower case...how do I now change it to Eaton in the wiki title? I can't seem to do it. Please either do it for me or let me know how, many thanks, cheers Peter morrell 07:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! thanks it worked and I learned something new! cheers :) Peter morrell 08:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am Simon Binks, born in Mordialloc Hospital, Melbounre, Victoria, Australia on November 27, 1956.
A lot of what you have on on your Website concerning Australian Crawl and on me is incorrect. I have attempted to correct it but this does not seem to have been successful. I am not even sure if this is the appropriate contact or method to address this. If not and you know what is, I would appreciate that advise. Truth is important to me.
You can trust a journalist, a random blogger, or one who lived through it.
I went to school with most of the members of Australian Crawl, was in the same year as James Reyne and Brad Robinson.
James and I started Australian Crawl after we left Spiff Rouch and I had taken time out for my first overseas trip to Bali, Penang and Singapore, where I later lived for three years and met my, as of yesterday, ex wife.
James, Brad and I were the best of friends. Brad and I were inseparable, until his death from cancer in August 1996; almost exactly one year after my accident. I was Best Man at Brad's wedding, he flew to Singapore for mine. I did not ask him to be my Best Man as I didn't want to burden him with a a trip he may have not been able to make at that time.
I have been screwed royally by this accident but more by recalcitrant solicitors and a council in damage control.
It is true that I received severe brain damage. I am also told that I am the only person to have made such a comprehensive recovery. I did this by not listening to doctors.
It is important that my miraculous recovery not be made public, as anyone who has gone through brain injury is asking the same questions: Am I alright? Am I the same? This is
anosognosia, the inability to self-reference, and I don't want to announce that I am the only person officially cleared of it. Countless other victims would be left crestfallen.
It is not true that I was .133 at the time of the accident. I had only had two drinks all night.
Even the constable (Constable Dunn) who had been with me that night and was ordered to charge me with DUI, was really uncomfortable, told me that he had been with me holding my head when I died, that I did not even smell of alcohol and was lucid and coherent until I stopped breathing. In his "expert opinion" I was not affected by alcohol. He told me awkwardly that he had been "Ordered to charge me", though he was clearly unhappy. He then left the police force but showed up at my trial 5 days in a row 12 years later.
I told my solicitors. They ignored me. He motioned me from the tiers, I couldn't get to him.
The PCA sheet from the hospital didn't even have my name on it.
At the former DUI trial, a conviction was not even recorded.
Constable Dun gave me the entire photographic record of the accident. It was when I saw how dangerous the roadworks were, how negligent the signage, or lack thereof; that I decided that I had a responsibility to hold the council accountable.
My spirit is very strong. I was lucky to survive. Another may not have been so.
The photographs showed evidence of countless cars that had come unstuck due to a huge hole in the road; an intended roundabout. There were skid marks of many different cars made evident by different profile skid marks.
Two cars hit an adjacent wall. I was unlucky to hit the lamp post.
I was earning roughly $250,000 pa before the accident. I had just returned from six months in Jakarta where I had earned US $120,000. That was 1994/5 when the US dollar was worth something.
So far I have only received $50,000 from my court farce. That's all gone on debts. I only expect to see the same amount again: less than one year's work intended to last me for the rest of my life. In was 38 when I had the accident. I owe more than that in debts that have arisen from the accident.
I only took the council to court out of a sense of moral responsibility, but that was lost in the erroneous DUI game. Convenient for the council. I remember saying at the time that I would be happy if I had my car replaced. I thought I would be back at work in no time.
That was 13 years ago.
The truth will be made public, when I am ready. The music I am writing, playing, singing now is my seal of approval and it all has to be handled correctly by a Publicist. I am still not happy the book I have written and the recordings are still demos.
Anything I place of your Website concerning me are facts. Cold, hard, irrefutable facts.
Sue me if you can prove them incorrect.
I can supply you with facts. I am very well-read, have dined with world leaders, lived in five countries and been to many more. I have fought the Yakuza in Japan, fed the hungry in India.
That not being enough in Bombay, surrounded by so much suffering and feeling at a loss as to what to do, I filled my spare diving wallet with cash and hurled it from my expensive top floor Indian hotel room. How could I choose who to help. Who not to. I left it to fate/chaos.
My goal in life is truth. I have written a book with my take on it, after conversations with some of the most respected authorities in their fields; Dr Barbara Thiering on theology, Professor Lawrence Peak, the only Australian on the Large Hardon Collider experiments at Cern, on quantum physics, etc, etc.
I make sure I know what I am talking about before I commit an opinion.
My life was a precious gift from two extraordinary people. I will not have my best efforts to live up to my parent's standards slurred.
Below is my email and phone, though just having separated from my wife, I will not be here long. I will include an email address that will survive the move, wherever life takes me next.
Simon Binks 144.131.169.131 (talk) 14:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
+61-3-97753054
sjbinks@bigpond.net.au
simonjbinks2@yahoo.com 144.131.169.131 (talk) 14:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please. I have lived in Oakamoor all my life. I was the one who created the Oakamoor page on Wikipedia. Please do not alter it anymore. I am changing it back to the way it was. And I will continue to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertert12345 (talk • contribs)
Again, I will assume and submit whatever I feel like. You are not God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertert12345 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By continually editing the Oakamoor article and deleting facts that are TRUE, it is YOU who is vandalizing the Oakamoor wikipedia entry and claming ownership. EVERYTHING that I have put in the entry was true, and if it was not due to misinformation from my various sources, it was edited accordingly. As you may now wikipedia is a public ownership encyclopedia, therefore it is up to its users to ensure information is true. I am doing this duty and ensuring that the Oakamoor entry is accurate and consistent with reality. If you do not stop this behavior I will recommend that your IP address is banned from wikipedia permanently. I am quite frankly ashamed that someone would want to defame the small village of Oakamoor and I think I speak for everyone when I say that you have no right to act in such a manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertert12345 (talk • contribs) 12:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you can see, I have altered the Oakamoor page. Now it has the official description provided by the the AboutBritain website who maintain a site about Oakamoor. It has a verifiable link. If you remove or change this page, I will treat the matter as vandalism. This is your last warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertert12345 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Stephen. I have replied to your complaint and I am recommending that you are banned from Wikipedia for continual vandalism and what I can only describe as cyber-harassment or cyber-terrorism. As you can see the Oakamoor page is updated with information provided by AboutBritain.com. If you continue to vandalize the page it only provides more evidence for your dismissal from the Wikipedia community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertert12345 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Old Trafford, Murrays' Mills and 1990 Strangeways Prison riot all passed GAC last month! In previous newsletters, the issue of WP:GM's lack of GAs has been raised numerously, so a large 'well done' to all those who contributed, be it little or large!
Also, Milnrow and City of Salford have been nominated at WP:GAC. Feel free to join in with their discussions here and here respectively. To 'obtain GA status for a third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs' is one of WP:GM's short-term aims, let's hope the City of Salford won't be the last borough with this status.
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on London! Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still flagging a little in GAs and falls behind London by 3. This is the closest we have ever got to taking the lead in local British GAs, if you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
And don't forget that the Manchester congestion charge article will need all input possible to keep it up to date with the government's new legislation (grumble grumble)...
Member News
There are 46 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. Our newest member is:
Let's not forget that Jza84 became an administrator this month! Congratulations on your new role.
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A rather large "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed..
Obtain GA status for one third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs.
Most of the articles covered by our new aims haven't experienced much activity in the past month, except for City of Salford being nominated at WP:GAC. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Articles such as List of people from Bolton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process.
Greater Manchester is, of course, our highest priority article. Mr Stephen posted some milestones to getting this article up to FA status a while back. Please check them out and see what you can do.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Reminders...
Images! The rate of good images has gone up since it was mentioned in the last issue, but we'll need more if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 12th April, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, we still 151 of our 1551 article unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Hello there! I've changed the colour of the rural districts in the map to the pale-pink suggested in the link you gave. You may have to refresh your browser (or even purge your cache), but I think you'll agree it works well. Thanks for the heads up about that colour scheme, I'll have to remember that for some of the other graphics I've promised folk, as well as some others I want to do myself (like a Hundreds of Lancashire and a full Salfordshire map).
On another note, following discussions with Malleus, Nev1 and Joshii, I've been making some "Areas of X" templates, like Template:Areas of Rochdale and Template:Areas of Wigan - split according to town. Rationale being to improve the navigation to and from some of our articles about small districts and localities which receive hardly any attention at all (some are orphaned and some are unknown to our readers or even editors).
I wondered if you'd be willing to help with a Template:Areas of Stockport? Areas of Stockport being those within the bounds of pre-74 Stockport in the aforementioned map? --Jza84 | Talk 14:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please, that would be great. I'm not familliar with Stockport, but I assume we're working from the former County Borough of Stockport being the basis for modern Stockport "town", which seems to be the approach elsewhere on WP. :) --Jza84 | Talk 01:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there Mr Stephen! Thanks for the contact!... and I thought I was the only one with intense hatred for this individual (I'm joking incase this diff is every cited against me as proof of my wicked ways!). I have to say, that since User:Yorkshirian has been banned, the whole atmosphere surrounding his area of interest has returned to a peaceful state, which is good, and I've made amends to a small part of his destructive trail of POV...
However, as you most rightfully point out, Yorkshirian has used multiple accounts in the past and I'm all to aware that he is likely to resurface in a new guise well before his 1 year ban is up. I'm ready for that and watching with care. Your analysis is very interesting though and User:Daddy Kindsoul is an account I hadn't come across before now. I'm more than confident that this is the same individual as Yorkshirian. Although the whole "death metal" thing sticks out as a little out-of-character (he may have grown out of it), we have edits to York City F.C., East Riding County League, and David Bowie from quite an early stage which provides a correlation that speaks for itself really.
I'm still convinced of a connection with User:Yorkshire Phoenix; traditional counties, anti-consensus, catholicism - all looks very familliar. --Jza84 | Talk 21:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oddly enough, I've just had a peek. Yorkshirian was banned July 13th, Yorkshire Phoenix started re-editting on July 16th. --Jza84 | Talk 21:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have created the Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Yorkshirian and included some of your Sherlock Holmes style notes to the talk page of that category. Looks like this guy had some serious issues if he and Daddy Kindsoul are one-and-the-same, just take a look at this! --Jza84 | Talk 14:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think we've nailed this. In addition to your fine detective work, I established a few links with Yorkshire and Italian football and some edit wars on Scotland, which pretty much confirms what you suspected. This guy is clearly chronic offender! I've tagged various accounts and documented our combined findings at Category talk:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Yorkshirian. --Jza84 | Talk 17:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I read in one of Daddy Kindsoul's arb/sock cases that he uses quite a broad range of ips, meaning that a range-block could potentially block thousands of potential editors (I presume in the East Riding!).
I noticed that CU missed out on finding a link with User:CalcioSalvo and Yorkshirian, backing this up. A checkuser (it seems) can only "home-in" on his physical whereabouts.... So, are there any maximum security prisons in the East Riding??? I jest of course! On a serious note, I've read through the cases of some of Daddy's abuse, and it's profound. I've just been sharing with another user that this army of sockpuppets is the route cause of one respectable editor being banned from certain content, whilst it (he rather!) is responsible for the breakdown of social cohesion on Scotland and Wales (following a formal mediation case hijacked by Fone4My) which still fosters a culture of letdown and mistrust in a great many of us.
As I said to User:Ddstretch, Daddy/Yorks/Fone is the single most extreme sockpuppeteer and bully I've ever encountered or read about on WP. Not good! --Jza84 | Talk 20:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. As someone here – I've found it, it's Larry sanger quoted here – said: "Show the door to trolls, vandals, and wiki-anarchists, who, if permitted, would waste your time and create a poisonous atmosphere here." And there's IMHO the biggest problem that this kind of thing causes. Creating a poisonous atmosphere, where trust (AGF in wikispeak) breaks down, is far worse than vandalism. Vandalism can easily be reverted, and fixing it can create a certain comeraderie (sp?) among the fixers, but when people fall out it takes a long time to put it right. Mr Stephen (talk) 21:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oldham, Ashton and Guide Bridge Railway bridge colour scheme[edit]
A question regarding the Oldham, Ashton and Guide Bridge Railway. I work for Oldham Council Highways and we are decommissioning a former railway underbridge by underfilling. We are looking to retain and restore one of the steel parapets. My question is would anyone know of the original railway company's colour scheme for painting of bridges and structures? Many thanks.Waltonhighschoolphoto82 (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I vaguely recall that you have a copy of Arrowsmith's history of Stockport? I was sizing up the Stockport article for a revamp and thought the book would be pretty much essential for the history section; unfortunately, for some reason I only have 2 pages of the book. If you do have the book would you consider rewriting the history section for the article? If you'd rather not, never mind, I should be able to find a copy. Thanks. Nev1 (talk) 17:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. What little work I have done on the Stockport article has shown me that it might not be as straightforward as the Trafford articles I've worked on. For example, a while ago I think I'd added a population change table that with figures for the borough as a whole. So I understand the problem. Nev1 (talk) 18:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester September Newsletter, Issue IX[edit]
It's been three months since the last newsletter, but there's been a lot going on...
Promoted articles:
Greater Manchester is one of our project's top priority articles, the Greater Manchester article comprehensively covers everything to do with the county, from culture and history, to transport and demography.
Manchester United F.C. records and statistics is about the records of one of Greater Manchester's best know clubs, which feats like "the club currently holds the record for the most FA Cup triumphs with 11".
City of Salford is about the local government area and Greater Manchester's second city. Getting Salford to GA is one our the aim's of our project, so hopefully this may help.
Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal is about the history and modern restoration of the disused canal running through the county. (It's now at FAC, so please improve the article if you can!)
Manchester Mummy is about Hannah Beswick, whose macabre fear of being buried alive lead to her demanding that her body was kept above ground and checked periodically for signs of life.
Milnrow is a small town in Rochdale with a long history. The wool trade was important to the town and was the basis of much of its industry. (It's also the first GA for Rochdale!)
Ordsall Hall is an important Tudor hall in Salford with a reputation for being haunted!
Bert Trautmann is the German goalkeeper who broke his neck playing for Manchester City... and carried on playing!
The Peterloo Massacre appeared on the front page on 16 August! Well done to everyone who contributed to the article about a key moment of Greater Manchester's history and managed to get it showcased.
A new portal has been set up! The Greater Manchester portal showcases some of the best articles to do with the county. Thanks to Polishname for single-handedly getting it up and running.
There is a proposal to move members who haven't edited for a while to an inactive members list, so if you've not been edited recently but still want to be a member let us know!
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 5 on Yorkshire and 11 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 5 more than London and 7 more than Yorkshire! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Although the project has had a lot of GAs and FAs recently, most of the articles covered by our short term aims haven't experienced much activity recently. Baby has undergone some change, but has a long way to go, and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester is very close to FL quality. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Articles such as List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Member News
There are 53 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. Since 12 June, the project has gained 7 new members:
Welcome to everyone, and let's remember to make these new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help.
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 1st September, we have had 99.5% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, we still 157 of our 1662 article unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Hello Mr Stephen. I am afraid to report a frankly annoying problem with wikipedia. I amj the person who you sent a message to yesterday, regarding a page named "Dave Jones" or something. I have never heard of this page, let alone edit it. I have had several messages from different wikipedia "members" telling me off, or even blocking my edits, for things that I simply did not do. I only edit where a feel edits are due, and do not vandalise. I am fed up with bveing blamed and blocked repeatedly for someone else's mistakes or vandalism. I use wikipedia constantly, and need this problem to be sorted ASAP.
Yours Sincerly,
Disgruntled User —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.84.147 (talk) 16:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At first sight, the last message I sent anyone about Dave Jones was in 2006. You probably have a dynamic IP address, and from time to time you get allocated one used by a vandal. If it bothers you, the easiest way to avoid these messages is to get an account, see Wikipedia:Account. Mr Stephen (talk) 17:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mr Stephen; just to let you know (as you have done some work on the list) that I will nominate this for WP:FLC shortly. If there are any problems or objections I can't resolve, I'll bring them to the WP:GM talk page. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many simillarities indeed. I'll monitor the pattern. This account seems slightly more constructive than previous ones, so worst case scenario is he is adhering to the golden rule: not getting caught. There's certainly a Leeds bias going on which is problematic in itself. --Jza84 | Talk 20:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester October Newsletter, Issue X[edit]
Usually this is where this month's promoted articles are listed, however there is something more important this month. In September, the project was notified which of its articles were selected for a DVD version of wikipedia. The 49 are listed here, although the quality ratings are a bit out of date. Twenty-two of the articles were GA-class or higher, and only five were below B-class. These are articles that have been selected by wikipedia, not simply as the best but the most important, so they require our attention, most importantly those that fall below GA standards. We still have until the 20th October to make changes to the articles, so please if you think you can improve any of them in any way please do so!
In other news, it's been a busy month with plenty going on...
Promoted articles:
The Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal is a disused canal undergoing restoration. The canal, which travels between Bolton and Manchester with a branch heading north east to Bury, was abandoned in 1961.
Having previously been described as "bare, wet, and almost worthless", Ashton-under-Lyne rose to prominence in the Industrial Revolution as one of the most famous mill towns in the north west.
Henry Taylor is Oldham's forgotten Olympic hero. He won 3 swimming golds at the 1908 Olympics, a record for most golds in a single games by a Briton until Chris Hoy equalled it this year.
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on Yorkshire and 15 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 5 more than London and 7 more than Yorkshire! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
There wasn't space in the last newsletter, but as of 24 July 2008 the project has a list of articles that have tags on them. As of 14 July 2008, 351 (21.8%) of our articles need a clean-up, although this should have gone down as some have already received attention (the bot does not seem to update the listing often).
In other news, the Merseyside Wikiproject has been set up. If you have an interest in the area or want to help out in any way, head over to the project page and pitch in.
In the past month we've achieved two of our short-term aims! The List of railway stations in Greater Manchester was expertly guided through the featured list process with hardly a problem, and now that Tameside is a GA a third of the county's boroughs are GA status or better. There's still plenty to do, some our our top-priority articles need referencing or tidying up, so don't hesitate to dive in! If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! And please keep an eye on the 49 articles selected for the wikipedia DVD.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Member News
No new members joined the project in September and there are 49 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. A new list of inactive members has been started. Anyone who hasn't made an edit to wikipedia since 1 March 2008 automatically goes onto the list.
If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 4th October, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, 151 of our 1684 articles remain unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Many thanks for moving the Wesleyan Methodism in Glodwick page to my user space. I don't know how you did it but I owe you a pint. Wiki is a weird environment to work in and clear concise information seems difficult to come by no matter how hard you try or how good your intentions are. Has anyone written a good book? (Probably a daft question!)At some time in the future I will need to find out how to move the article into main space, or are there people who can review it and advise me of its suitability before I venture to take it 'live'. I prefer not to be mauled in public! Ian (talk) 13:07, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
These recent edits have been made by an IP editor to the Stockport article. My geography's not great but I thought Stockport was historically just in Cheshire. I know it was at least on the north eastern extremity, but I'm hoping you know better than I do. Nev1 (talk) 13:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ddstretch has removed the information, I think he's right that it's too much detail for the lead. Something should be added to the governance section when it's expanded, but as you've demonstrated it's not a simple situation. Nev1 (talk) 12:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester November Newsletter, Issue XI[edit]
It's been a quieter month than September, but plenty has been going on...
Promoted articles:
Born in Stalybridge and raised in Ashton-under-Lyne, Hugh Mason was a mill owner and politician. He was popular among his workers for shortening the working week at his factories without cutting their pay.
No articles were DYKs this month. For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on Yorkshire and 14 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 7 more than both Yorkshire and London! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
Trafford was featured on the main page on the 12th October and was viewed 13,800 on the day (27,100 times over 4 days).
The project's cleanup listing has been updated with stats from 8 October. As of 14 July, 351 (21.8%) of our articles need a clean-up, this has risen to 447 out of 1689 (26.5%). Although this is disappointing, it reflects a more widespread use of tags on articles to indicate what needs attention rather than a decline in the standard of this project's articles.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Member News
There are now 53 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester as 4 new members joined the project in October:
Welcome to everyone, and let's remember to make these new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
On top of these aims, some our our top-priority articles need referencing or tidying up, so don't hesitate to dive in! If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 1st November, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, 75 of our 1708 articles remain unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Last but not Least... If you've got a story to go in next month's news letter, leave a note here.
Delivered on 2 November 2008 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
I have received the following message -
____________________________________
Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Mr Stephen (talk) 18:37, 19
____________________________________
I have absolutely no desire to add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. I apologise if I have inadvertently contravened the rules of Wikipedia. However, could you explain how I can add information about the Didsbury site as it is very much used by the community and visitors alike. Is an article more appropriate?
I can assure you that our intention is NOT to promote a product to sell. Our intention is to share a resource.
I would be very grateful if you could advise me on this situation.
Thank you for your reply. I now have a clearer understanding of the Wikipedia guidelines. However, I have just checked "Cheadle" and "Manchester" on Wikipedia. In the external links, I have noticed two links which do seem to contradict what you have advised me. Cheadle Online is included as an external link - this certainly would appear to have an obvious profit-making slant, as under the banners is a message stating "Want to advertise here?". On the Manchester site, "www.visitmanchester.com" is included as an exernal link - and through this link I could definitely find somehwere to go at night, where to have my hair cut etc. Indeed, all of the reasons you gave for the exclusion of a site such as Didsbury Life. Curious!Lifewebsites (talk) 11:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you can help, --Jza84 | Talk 17:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! Brilliant! Thanks! I didn't expect anything quite so soon... not that I want to put you off of course! Thanks Mr Stephen! --Jza84 | Talk 22:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I swapped the map so that it now displays at Prestwich-cum-Oldham. I think the title needs changing to "Ancient Parish of Prestwich-cum-Oldham" at the bottom (I don't know why Brownbill has it as Prestwich and Radcliffe). Also, where Yorkshire is it says "here be dragons" - probably something you intended to come back to??!
I just wish I had SVG ability and access to help! --Jza84 | Talk 15:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--! Actually, I've just realised the map is of Prestwich-cum-Oldham AND Radcliffe parish. I wonder if we can remove Radcliffe, and make it appear like Bolton and Bury do, in the background? --Jza84 | Talk 15:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be spot on! Thanks Mr Stephen! Sorry to be a burden - it's for a good cause! Thanks again, --Jza84 | Talk 21:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and if possible, change Bolton to "Bolton le Moors", but it's ok if that's not possible. :) --Jza84 | Talk 21:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic! Thanks ever so much. I really ought to get to grips with SVG - I feel so guilty asking others to draw stuff! :S --Jza84 | Talk 23:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester December Newsletter, Issue XII[edit]
November has been a successful month, with lots of progress made on articles, and more work in the pipe-line:
Promoted articles:
Scout Moor Wind Farm is England's largest onshore wind farm. Although it was opposed by environmentalists, the wind farm was opened on 26 September 2008 and provides enough power for 40,000 homes.
The River Irwell runs 39 miles from its source in Lancashire until it joins with the River Mersey. The river was important in the Industrial Revolution, and was left poluted with industrial waste and lifeless.
The Bridgewater Canal is currently a GA nominee and the Scout Moor Wind Farm is under scrutiny at WP:FAC. Please keep an eye on these articles and if any issues are raised in their reviews help to address them. Hopefully, next month we can report on two more promoted articles!
Scout Moor Wind Farm featured in the DYK section of the front page last month. For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on Yorkshire and 14 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 10 more Yorkshire and 11 more than London! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Member News
There are now 50 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester as 2 new members joined the project in November:
Welcome to everyone, and let's remember to make these new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Already we're making great progress, and Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine and the River Irwell are already GAs, while Scout Moor Wind Farm is on the way to becoming an FA! The Congestion charging in Greater Manchester and Greater Manchester Transport Innovation Fund (TiF) are hot topics at the moment with the referendum currently open. As an aside, some of our top-priority articles need referencing or tidying up, so don't hesitate to dive in. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Articles needing attention Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater Manchester/Cleanup listing|list of articles needing cleanup]] are in permanent need of attention.
I know it's early but since there won't be a newsletter for a month... merry Christmas everyone, enjoy the holiday and mince pies.
Delivered on 5 December 2008 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
Hi there, unfortunately I dont have any pictures of the old Arndale. On the issue of the number of images, as I dont have Flickr Pro at the moment only pictures uploaded in the last year are visible from my account page. However, all images do turn up in searches on Flickr Pit-yacker (talk) 22:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester January Newsletter, Issue XIII[edit]
December has been a very successful month, with lots of article promoted, and hopefully more to come in January:
Promoted articles:
Scout Moor Wind Farm
Scout Moor Wind Farm is England's largest onshore wind farm. Although it was opposed by environmentalists, the wind farm was opened on 26 September 2008 and provides enough power for 40,000 homes.
The B of the Bang is the sculpture that was erected to commemorate the 2002 Commonwealth Games and for a while was the largest sculpture in the UK. And because of safety concerns, it may be dismantled.
Current nominations: January looks set to be very busy, with Chadderton, Cine City, Withington, and Nico Ditch at WP:GAN, the Greater Manchester portal up for Featured Portal status, and Sale a Featured Article Candidate. Please keep an eye on these articles and if any issues are raised in their reviews help to address them.
Abram featured in the DYK section of the front page last month. For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
The project has a new tool, a watchlist of all our project's articles. This should help us keep an eye on them and spot new editors who might want to join our project. Also, Jza84 has developed a map of WP:GM's GAs and FAs. It shows a gap in coverage in the north west of the county, something we should try to change.
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as Featured and Good content goes, our lead is extending, with 10 and 16 more FAs than Yorkshire and London respectively, and 13 and 14 more GAs than Yorkshire and London! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Two of our aims were crossed off as Scout Moor Wind Farm became an FA, and Radcliffe, Greater Manchester a GA. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Member News
There are now 46 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 14 members inactive since 1 July 2008) as 1 new member joined the project in December:
Welcome from everyone, and let's remember to make new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
I have added both to my sandbox now so you can click them both Test
Yours is "Search the Archives 2"
Its just a little confusing for newbies i think, if they can't work out to put their own search topic where it say "type here" then maybe they will stripe off the whole sentence and end up searching wiki, but ah well, we can deal with that later lol
K I've put it in my sandbox, only small prob is it seems a bit big in there - I've been messing with it to try and get the text smaller but i gave up lol!
My computer was hacked recently, and I made no such edit. It is possible that my Wikipedia account (MinnesotanConfederacy) was hacked as well.63.225.145.18 (talk) 06:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester February Newsletter, Issue XIV[edit]
With the new(ish) year, I think it's right to look back over the year just gone. Last year was massive for our project, with lots of successes building on a successful 2007. In terms of featured content, we became the leading wikiproject in 2007, but 2008 saw us cement our status as one of the UK's leading wikiprojects: having started the year with most FAs (two more than London and Yorkshire), but falling behind in terms of GAs, we now have more FAs and GAs than any project under WP:UKGEO. While our aim is to improve all articles related to Greater Manchester, not collect trophies, we now lead the field by a long way and everyone deserves to feel proud for their part.
We've had articles featured on the main page, both in DYK? and as today's Featured Article, but success is more than a matter of numbers; the project has grown into a community where editors join together to provide information and improve Wikipedia. A great example of this is the work our project did on Denshaw. Back in April, it was targeted by vandals and as a result was featured in national news. We stepped in and improved and protected the article, showing what WP:GM is capable of. This is undoubtedly the noisiest project in the UK and it's strength comes from the wide range of interests of its many members. We've even been so successful that we were accused of forming a claque.
During 2008, our numbers have increased and, while some have left, we've welcomed many strong editors who will help bring the project more success. With so much emphasis on Good and Featured articles, it's sometimes easy to forget that a lot of effort goes into articles that don't get recognition. The table below shows that the number of B-class articles has increased since the start of 2008, and that the proportion of stub-class articles under our project has gone down.
My own experience of Wikipedia has been positive and enjoyable, especially due to WP:GM. I've worked on interesting subjects with nice people, and hopefully the experience is similar for others. We've covered subjects as varied and interesting as castles, mummies, computers, Olympic swimmers, and wind farms, stuff I probably wouldn’t know about if it wasn’t for Wikipedia. I enjoy being a part of this project, and as we approach the WP:GM's second birthday (24 February) I'm sure it will continue to go from strength to strength in 2009.
Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!
Project News
January has been a very successful month, with lots of article promoted, and hopefully more to come in January:
Promoted articles:
View of Broadway in Chadderton
Chadderton is a town in the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham. It has a long and interesting history beyond that of its mill town façade; a Celtic hill fort, a medieval lordship and still an important industrial and metropolitan town.
Nico Ditch stretches from Ashton-under-Lyne to Stretford and according to legend was dug in a single night to defend against the Danes.
Article news: Cine City, Withington is at WP:GAN, please keep an eye on these articles and if any issues are raised in their reviews help to address them. Unfortunately, despite User:Joshii's effort the Greater Manchester portal did not become featured.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Member News
There are now 48 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 14 members inactive since 1 July 2008) as 2 new members joined the project in January:
Welcome from everyone, and let's remember to make new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Thanks for {{Archive GM searchable}} - the search code is a great addition to the archives template. Rather than having two separate templates for this, I've now merged this code into the main {{archives}} template; the search field can be triggered with the search=yes parameter. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester March Newsletter, Issue XV[edit]
Happy birthday! It was the project's second birthday on 24 February, so thank you to everyone who's helped improve and Greater Manchester related article, not just our members, your work is very much appreciated. The last month has been very successful, with lots activity:
Nico Ditch stretches from Ashton-under-Lyne to Stretford and according to legend was dug in a single night to defend against the Danes.
Cine City in 2004
The Cine City, Withington, was the third cinema to open in Britain and when it closed in 2001 it was the third longest running cinema in England. It was opened in 1912, and demolished in 2008.
Current nominations: As of the completion of this newsletter, there are no GA nominations, but Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine and Buckton Castle are at FAC. The articles detail the world's first stored-program computer, and the best preserved castle in Greater Manchester. There's a good chance that one or more of these interesting articles could be promoted, so please keep an eye on them in case there's any way you can help!
Charles White (physician) and Worsley featured in the DYK section of the front page last month (actually, Worsley featured in January but was missed out of the last newsletter!). For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
The project's cleanup listing has been updated with stats from 24 February 2009. As of 8 October 2008, 447 (26.5%) of 1689 our articles needed a clean-up, this has risen slightly to 455 out of 1809 (25.2%). This is encouraging as the proportion has gone down, and indicates the standard of the project's articles are steadily improving. While the high-profile successes of GAs and FAs are important, the project's aim is to improve all GM-related articles.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Sister projects
In an attempt to encourage communication between related wikiprojects, or to at least raise awareness, this section is dedicated to the important goings on of WP:Merseyside and WP:Cheshire, our sister projects and the only other user groups dedicated to improving articles in North West England.
WP:CHES – After a period of low activity, the project has picked up recently, with initiatives (such as beginning a newsletter and sending a questionnaire to its member) to encourage greater participation from its members. This has paid dividends with two GAs being promoted in February and greater activity in general.
WP:MERSEY – After being set-up in September 2008, the project is experiencing a period of lowish activity. While the project has a handful of FAs and GAs, most of its articles are unassessed; assessing requires no familiarity with a subject, so any help WP:GM members can lend would be greatly appreciated.
Other news
There is a meet-up scheduled for 14 March in Manchester for anyone interested. It is not organised by WP:GM and is open to all wikipedians. More details can be found here.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
After a flurry of activity in January, progress on the Salford article has slowed, but it is steadily progressing towards a good standard. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
The project compared
The Greater Manchester WikiProject is one of the leading UK-based groups. Some other projects are no as lucky as we are in the numbers of active enthusiastic users. Below are some statistics of the other leading UK projects and some geographically close to Greater Manchester.
There are now 46 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 17 members inactive since 1 September 2008) as 1 new member joined the project in February:
Majorly is an experienced editor who has recently decided to join WP:GM, and has been working hard on Cheadle Hulme. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Thank you for taking the time to point out the problems in the sources on Nadya Suleman. I can't tell you how much this helps! — raeky(talk | edits) 19:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The manchester page is being seriously vandalised. Whelanmk (talk) 10:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of Christopher Spencer (author)[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Christopher Spencer (author), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
He's a spokesman of behalf of e-bay who's written a "how to" book. There's nothing notable here, and less that's verifiable.
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Scott Mac (Doc) 20:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AfD nomination of Christopher Spencer (author)[edit]
I have nominated Christopher Spencer (author), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Spencer (author). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Scott Mac (Doc) 14:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The MOS, lower-case country names for subs, etc[edit]
DynamoDegsy. I've been through a number of the Rugby League articles changing things like [[Leigh]] to [[Leigh Hornets|Leigh]], removing some self-references (I see I missed some), and general cleanups. I tripped up over the use (yours?) of lower case letters (eg papua new guinea) to indicate that a player came on as a sub. A couple of other editors have done the same, thinking it was a mistake. Do you have any major disagreement with me swapping (eg) "france" for "France (sub)"? Similarly, you shouldn't really use bold much in the body of an article for emphasis, you should use italics. Again, do you have an issue with me swapping England for England? Lastly, "whilst" is depracated in favour of "while". So, to take a (slightly made up) example, "Stuart Wright, for England whilst at Wigan 1975 new zealand" would become "Stuart Wright, for England whilst at Wigan 1975 New Zealand (sub)". I can see you put a lot of work into these articles, so I don't want to irritate for the sake of it, but I'm trying to bring them into line with the MOS. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, do you have an opinion? Mr Stephen (talk) 16:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did have the country name in italics but it looked a little insipid, so I beefed it up to bold, but I’ve no objection to it being in italics if that’s the preferred format. The lower case country name for players' substitute appearances was used in my source data; I realised it wasn’t ideal, but I’d not got around to changing it, so please feel free to capitalise and (sub) them, and I’ve no objection to a change to while from whilst either. DynamoDegsy (talk) 19:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for spotting the typo in the ISBN. I'll have to change it on a variety of articles. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 00:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah its a small crossing that replaced a bridge lost when the canal was built. Included in the original Act I believe. Its hardly ever manned and I'm thinking about kicking up a fuss over it :) Location is here. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have just published the above book which is available in all the major book stores in the UK.
The book is the leading and most current review of the events of Peterloo, and incorporates the views
of members of the Peterloo Group in Manchester.
I disgree with your comments that it is spam, and would like the references to be included.
As you will see from the book, I am a historian that has a particular interest in Peterloo in that my great great great grandfather
carried a flag on that day in Peter's field in Manchester, and he became a well known poet.
The book reflects my family and historical interest in this particular event.
I understand that the book is not spam. The reference inserted reflects a new and emergent view that the Massacre was avoidable and reflected a Government bias and fear of revolution. It included also the emergence of Universal suffrage and female suffrage prior to the Pankhursts to whom female suffrage has been falsely attributed.
The book is not Vanity Press, and not self publishing. This book together with my other book are available on Amazon, Hoyles, Harrods, Waterstones, Blackwells etc.
Bush, Michael (2005). The Casualties of Peterloo. Carnegie Publishing. ISBN1-85936-125-0.
Frangopulo, N. J. (1977). Tradition in Action: The Historical Evolution of the Greater Manchester County. EP Publishing, Wakefield. ISBN0-7158-1203-3.
Frow, Edmund & Ruth (1984). Radical Salford: Episodes in Labour History. Radcliffe: Neil Richardson. ISBN0-907511-49-X.
Hernon, Ian (2006). Riot!: Civil Insurrection from Peterloo to the Present Day. Pluto Press. ISBN0-7453-2538-6.
Jackson, Paul (2003). The Life and Music of Sir Malcolm Arnold:The Brilliant and the Dark. Ashgate Publishing Ltd. ISBN1-85928-381-0.
Marlow, Joyce (1969). The Peterloo Massacre. Rapp & Whiting. ISBN0-85391-122-3.
Pickering, Paul A.; Tyrrell, Alex (2000). The People's Bread: A History of the Anti-Corn Law League. Leicester University Press. ISBN0-7185-0218-3.
McPhillips, K. (1977). Oldham: The Formative Years. Neil Richardson. ISBN1-85216-119-1.
Poole, Robert (2006). "'By the Law or the Sword': Peterloo Revisited". History 91: 254–276. doi:10.1111/j.1468-229X.2006.00366.x.
Poole, Steve (2000). The Politics of Regicide in England, 1760–1850. Manchester University Press. ISBN0-7190-5035-9.
Prentice, Archibald (1851). Historical Sketches and Personal Recollections of Manchester: Intended to illustrate the progress of public opinion from 1792 to 1832 (1970 reprint of the 2nd ed.). Routledge. ISBN0-7146-1353-3.
Read, Donald (1973). Peterloo: the "massacre" and its background. Manchester University Press. ISBN0-678-06791-0.
Reid, Robert (1989). The Peterloo Massacre. William Heinemann Ltd. ISBN0-434-62901-4.
Walmsley, Robert (1969). Peterloo: The Case Re-opened. Manchester University Press. ISBN0-7190-0392-X.
Most of these authors are employed by the organisaation that is responsible for publishing the books to which they refer. It is pretty much a requirement of their job that they publish books to maintain the credibility of their authority. This is a reasonable definition of Vanity Press. Require the Job holder to publish books printed by the University press. Without Reid, Marlow Bush and Poole the Wiki is not much of an independent authoritative reflection of the facts of Peterloo.
I would like the references to be reinstated. If your definition of Vanity Press is someone publising their own book then all University Presses that publish books written by their staff fit into that category and thereby all University staff publishing books by presses owned by the university should be disqualified as Vanity Press. This would make a large hole in the Wiki if it was applied as you describe.
Hi do you think this deserves its own article, or would it be worth just mentioning it in Adswood or Edgeley as appropriate? Majorlytalk 15:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reversion on the Notenglish template. I didn't catch the change in the syntax, and was confused about why Albanian to English was classified as English to English, while English to English was perfectly fine. :-) --Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
