User talk:Redrose64

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello, Redrose64! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! --Jza84 |  Talk  13:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do

Invasion of Time edits[edit]

The link you asked for[edit]

Sorry I'm bad at using wikipedia and messed up adding the cite, I asked Northern the other day about Bolton's Platform 2 and they replied to me


Seasons Greeting to you and yours[edit]

To you[edit]

Weihnachten10.gif Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

The Monk[edit]

I was sitting with a high steward, discussing Anglo-Saxon monks. The name we couldn't remember was Nennius. All the best: Rich Farmbrough04:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC).


Weihnachten10.gif Happy Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

Happy New Year![edit]

Fuochi d'artificio.gif

Dear Redrose64,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Template talk:WikiProject Biography[edit]

Hi Redrose64, quick message. On Template talk:WikiProject Biography, I removed the category not because I had been lazy and just not fixed the issue, I just hadn't realised that it might have been there because someone had posted a link to it in the talk. I had assumed it was just a one-time problem with the actual template itself at the top of the talk page, and so I could fix that by removing the category. I used hot cat, so didn't actually see what I had deleted. I should have checked changes before pressing to save my edit. I apologise, I just wanted to clear any misunderstanding. Thanks, SamWilson989 (talk)

Sailing from Holyhead?[edit]

Where can you sail to by Stena Line? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IkbenFrank (talkcontribs) 20:08, 27 April 2015

Season's Greetings[edit]

CMR Xmas greeting.jpg
Wishing you a Charlie Brown
Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄
Best wishes for your Christmas
Is all you get from me
'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus
Don't own no Christmas tree.
But if wishes was health and money
I'd fill your buck-skin poke
Your doctor would go hungry
An' you never would be broke."
—C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914.

VarunFEB2003 and template signatures.[edit]

WP:Help desk#Sign issue

An issue with a template notice, maybe?[edit]

Hi RR - I think there may be an issue with a template notice at AHA Foundation and I don't know how to fix it. The merge discussion notice for the infobox reaches into the lead paragraph. Will you take a look at it when you have time? Thanks bunches...Atsme📞📧 16:31, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

@Atsme: It seems to, but actually it doesn't. The horizontal line below the word "merging" is the bottom edge of a floated box; if you imagine a vertical line beginning at the left-hand end of that horizontal line and going upwards, essentially the (non-existent) left border of the same floated box, this imaginary line doesn't cut through any text - the lead section text is all to its left. This is what happens when you have two right-aligned floated boxes that are different widths. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Ok, thx. When viewing it on my iPad using Safari, it appears as you described. On my 15" laptop using Firefox, it appears to the left of the infobox and imposes on the first line of the justified paragraph. Perhaps it's a browser/screen width issue. At least it's not a permanent issue, so not a biggy. Thanks again. Atsme📞📧 10:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

WP:PREVIEW callouts[edit]

[1] Only used what the tool suggested (the edit was marked as "assisted")—would have been easier to have just fixed the template czar 02:27, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Czar: I did fix the template. But tool or not, you are responsible for every edit that you make. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:51, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I meant this, and I generally am czar 21:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Your intervention on 'State Atheism'[edit]

Hello - thanks for your intervention, but the RfC was about a simple WP:POLICY transgression, as the article does that (WP:NEOLOGISM) without even considering the content; inviting a content-debate will only distract from (and, predictably, drown) that, and one can easily conclude that that was the intended goal (of adding the categories/'extra' RfC).
If I have misunderstood something about RfC policy-ing (by your comment it would seem that you think that I intend to change Wikipedia policy itself), please let me know a better place/way of inviting attention/advice about articles that fall short of Wikipedia policy, as, according to recent experience and the page's history, any attempt to make the article conform to Wikipedia policy will most most likely be reverted (edit-warred) - that is the very reason I opened the RfC. Thank you. THEPROMENADER   23:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
PS: You also added a 'society sports and culture' category that has nothing at all to do with even the article content (why not 'history'?) - now the RfC is about everything but its original topic. THEPROMENADER   00:14, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

@ThePromenader: The |policy parameter - which puts the RfC into Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines - is not for discussions where the application of policy to an article is in dispute, but for discussions about changing the policy itself. For disputes concerning article content, the following are available:
see also the table at WP:RFC#Categories. Clearly "Politics, government, and law" (which covers the state) and "Religion and philosophy" (which covers atheism) are directly relevant here; I included "Society, sports, and culture" because the way that people behave is also relevant: as shown at the top of our article on Society, a large social group sharing the same geographical or social territory, typically subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations. The fact that the rfc category covers sports as well had no bearing on my choice - I am not implying that it is a sports matter in any way. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Actually, adding the extra categories isn't harmful at all, as it brings more eyes to the question, but through focusing on the WP:POLICY angle, I wanted to a) avoid needlessly 'blasting' thousands of contributors (as mentioned in the RfC guidelines) and b) keep the discussion to that one point; having more input from everywhere makes it a 'content', not a policy, issue... the road to making a decision on the RfC point of contention (that remains) will be a much longer one, that's all.
I misunderstood that RfC 'policy' issues are about the policies themselves, and I'm sorry about that, and I was in no way implying any underlying motive in your action; I just didn't understand your addition (and not another). And since we're already there, I may as well add 'history' to the RfC as well, because that is what the article is rooted in (and its title's absence from historical consensus and reliable references). Thanks, and cheers.THEPROMENADER   08:30, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Inability to print out hard copies of Wikipedia RDT line templates in the normal print size.[edit]

We have just returned from a two week holiday in Cornwall and I wished to make hard copy prints of both the West Coastway Main Line RDT line template and the South Western Main Line RDT line template as both of these have had a closed station added to them. However, as was the case quite some time ago, I am unable to make such hard copy print out in the normal print size, but only in a much smaller font size of type

I understand that the last time this occurred, someone had done something to prevent this happening and after I highlighted the matter, matters were put right, so I beg your assistance in this matter.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Real Life Barnstar.jpg The Real Life Barnstar
Nice to meet you Redrose64, look forward to doing it again. — fortunavelut luna 11:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Line #s in edit summaries[edit]

Hi, RR - I was wondering if maybe you know the purpose of the line numbers when reviewing a diff? It would certainly be helpful if line numbers showed up in the margin of the text so we could scroll down to that line # in the preview but I'm not seeing where that's possible. Do you know what purpose the line # serves or how we can find it in the text? Atsme📞📧 12:19, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I think that the line numbers do show when using certain editors, but not with the default wikitext editor. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Stephenson's link valve gear[edit]

Hi, The image of Stephenson link valve gear is about to be deleted on Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Stephenson_link_valve_gear.jpg. It looks out of copyright to me and I think the request should be now removed. What do you think? Aspro (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm not a copyright expert, nor am I an expert on French law. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

isle of wight line page[edit]

Thanks for cleaning up the changes I made to this page, I've never made an update before so have no real clue on the process. One thing how do you deal with the issue caused by needing a web-based citation if the only information is from dynamic web pages. I do not think the rail network publishes a book/pdf of all ticket prices any longer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

You shouldn't be using primary sources, particularly not one that is directly connected to the subject organisation. Instead, use an independent source (preferably one that is considered a reliable source), such as one of the magazines devoted to the rail industry - Modern Railways; Rail; The Railway Magazine; or Today's Railways. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, I've no interest in the wider issues of the rail network and so don't know the sources you have detailed. I know the services in question and costs as I myself make use of the low cost season tickets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid that personal knowledge does not satisfy the policy on verifiability and normally also goes against the policy on original research. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:41, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
It's a fair policy, so I have no problem with it, it just means the page will have the citation flag for some time. Having the information there will at least allow those people with an interest/need to go and do their own research via the dynamic ticket websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:13, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit 23:34, 5th September on London Waterloo[edit]

Would you be kind enough to explain what was wrong with the list mark up that you changed in this edit. I ask, because the change you've made seems to alter what the list is supposed to actually present. I'm referring specifically to the change made to services via Twickenham on the Windsor lines.Sjoh123 (talk) 10:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Sjoh123: I altered this:
* 12 tph ''via'' Barnes (Windsor Lines)
:* 2 tph to {{rws|Reading}} via {{rws|Ascot}}{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 2 : Reading and Ascot to London Waterloo}}
:* 2 tph to {{rws|Windsor & Eton Riverside}}{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 4 : Windsor and Feltham to London Waterloo}}
:* 4 tph to {{rws|Twickenham}}, of which
::* 2 tph via {{rws|Hounslow}} back to Waterloo{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 7 : Hounslow Loop to Waterloo}}, and
::* 2 tph via {{rws|Teddington}} back to Waterloo{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 1 : Kingston Loop and Shepperton to London Waterloo}} (the reverse of the loop detailed above in Local)
:* 4tph to {{rws|Hounslow}} via {{rws|Brentford}}, of which
::* 2 tph to {{rws|Weybridge}} via {{rws|Egham}}{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 16 : Weybridge (via Staines) to London Waterloo}}
::* 2 tph via {{rws|Twickenham}} back to Waterloo{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 7 : Hounslow Loop to Waterloo}} (The reverse of the loop detailed above)
to this:
* 12 tph ''via'' Barnes (Windsor Lines)
** 2 tph to {{rws|Reading}} via {{rws|Ascot}}{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 2 : Reading and Ascot to London Waterloo}}
** 2 tph to {{rws|Windsor & Eton Riverside}}{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 4 : Windsor and Feltham to London Waterloo}}
** 4 tph to {{rws|Twickenham}}, of which
*** 2 tph via {{rws|Hounslow}} back to Waterloo{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 7 : Hounslow Loop to Waterloo}}, and
**** 2 tph via {{rws|Teddington}} back to Waterloo{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 1 : Kingston Loop and Shepperton to London Waterloo}} (the reverse of the loop detailed above in Local)
** 4tph to {{rws|Hounslow}} via {{rws|Brentford}}, of which
*** 2 tph to {{rws|Weybridge}} via {{rws|Egham}}{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 16 : Weybridge (via Staines) to London Waterloo}}
*** 2 tph via {{rws|Twickenham}} back to Waterloo{{sfn|SWR|loc=Table 7 : Hounslow Loop to Waterloo}} (The reverse of the loop detailed above)
Before my edit, there were two separate lists: one bulleted list with a single entry, followed by one association list, also with a single entry. Within the latter, there were four separate lists: one bulleted list with three entries; one association list with a single entry containing a two-entry bulleted list; one bulleted list with a single entry; and one association list with a single entry containing a two-entry bulleted list. After my edit, there are far fewer lists, there is one consistent structure, and it is far better for those who use screen reader software. When nesting lists, it is permissible to nest different types of list; but they must be nested from the outside inwards. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Angel tube station[edit]

I'm confused by your comment for your edit of Angel Tube Station. You removed a reference (which was not inserted by me, so can't be my WP:NOR) stating that it doesn't mention Angel; but neither does that for Prague metro. (1) Should that have been removed as well? (2) Does this also mean that the article really shouldn't mention its ranking for escalator length at all unless a definitive reference gives that information? (3) Would the same apply to the information at Escalator? Bazza (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I didn't look at pre-existing refs (which I took in good faith), only at the one that was added by 2A00:1028:96CD:37E2:F8F3:C580:6CE:7F37 (talk) in this edit. This ref does not mention Angel - nor is there any sort of ranked list that I can see - so I can only conclude that the IP user is deciding that since the one at Helsinki Airport is apparently longer than the one at Angel, it will necessarily push Angel down one place from fourth-longest to fifth. This is WP:SYNTH, which is a particular kind of WP:NOR. The rule is: do not draw your own conclusions, but describe the conclusions that others have already published. So what we need is a reliable source directly concerning Angel and stating that its escalators are fifth-longest; alternatively a reliable source which gives a ranked list of stations by escalator length, one of which must be Angel. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:34, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. I've added a reference for Heathrow (T2 it seems, not T5) and removed the my-escalator's-bigger-than-yours unreferenced fact about Western Europe. Escalator seems to have the same problem, but it's not really a pet subject of mine, just edited in passing. Bazza (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Communication problems with IkbenFrank. (I notice you've run into this editor too). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Nonconstructive edits by unregistered account[edit]

Hi there.

This user has been making nonconstructive edits to the Arriva Trains Wales and Northern fleetlist tables and it's getting tiresome undoing it all (twice today). I appreciate that they want to contribute but all they're doing is making the fleet tables on various TOC pages look untidy. Hope you can help - Coradia175 (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I think that what they're trying to do is make the table narrower, in order to fit whatever screen they're using. However, they do not know how wide everybody else's screen is. The worst of it is that they shorten links with the result that the link is either broken, or ends up pointing to a dab page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
He was repeatedly linking to DVT, which redirects to deep vein thrombosis, instead of driving van trailer. He is also repeatedly violating MOS:DATERANGE, but any warning on his user talk page is immediately deleted and ignored. Abbreviations such as "MK3" for Mark 3 are not in accordance with common usage; "Mk3" might be acceptable. In many other respects his changes are contrary to the format which has been established by consensus. Various editors have reverted some of his changes, but he edit-wars them back in again. He has made no attempt to explain his changes either in edit summaries or on article talk pages. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:08, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
DVT is an example of "they shorten links with the result that the link is ... broken". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
The person concerned uses a static IP address, so could be blocked; but if we do that, they'll get a new one. They've done that before, for instance (talk) is an old one of theirs. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Could we possibly protect the pages they are editing so only registered users can edit them? And I apologise for using the obsolete markers by the way - I'll keep that in mind for my future edits :-) - Coradia175 (talk) 20:21, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
With their current IP address, they have edited all of the following:
I don't think that I am justified in semi-protecting all of those. The admins at WP:RFPP might consider protecting on a case by case basis. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I guess we can see how things go and go to WP:RFPP if it continues to be an issue - Coradia175 (talk) 21:09, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Diffuse category[edit]

I'm afraid I don't understand this, I'm not offended, but puzzled even after looking at WP:DIFUSE, would it be that the category is so 'bloated' and ill-defined as to be valueless? If that is the case, having looked at Category:Fictional_English_people, I would agree. Half the UK plays, poems, films etc since the year dot feature "Fictional English people", and most are not there. Just puzzled, I don't categorise very often and tend to do more removing than adding myself. Pincrete (talk) 20:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC) (please ping if replying).

@Pincrete: You link an old version above, not an edit of mine. But I assume that you mean this edit; also, I linked WP:CATDIFFUSE, I did not give a redlink. Finally, I left Category:Fictional English people alone: the article was in that category before my edit, and still in that category afterward.
Anyway, my edit was a reversion of the previous edit: the person who added the article to Category:Fictional British people, that is (talk), had made a lot of edits recently where they had added one or more categories to pages which were already in a subcategory of the one concerned. In this case, the article was already in Category:Fictional English people, which is a subcategory of Category:Fictional British people; and my reversion merely removed the extra category. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, I don't think I'm normally do daft! I hope not. Pincrete (talk) 06:48, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

A treat[edit]

Hello R. Have you seen this yet? Some delightful drawings by Russell T and a wonderful message for all Dr Who fans. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:17, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
Mind you, it's not saying much, as the ape men of the Indus Valley have a clearer understanding of coding than I  :) but thank you, anyway, for the help on my page. Lookin' good! — fortunavelut luna 17:09, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:24, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Manchester and Milford Railway[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Manchester and Milford Railway has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jc86035 (talk) 08:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)


The tip of the pale green spire of Nuffield College indicates the roof of The Four Candles, the normal venue for Oxford meetups

hi...when are next meet ups? Whispyhistory (talk) 20:42, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@Whispyhistory: You missed London 123 yesterday, next is Oxford 55 this coming Sunday; generally, you should find a notice at the top of your watchlist (unless you've dismissed it). But if you go to the page for any UK meetup, past or future, you should find a pink sidebar on the right that lists upcoming and recent, also a navbox at the bottom which groups by town/city. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Thank message has been coming up on my watchlist like before Whispyhistory (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry... should be there now. Another method is to add any one or more of these to your watchlist: Template:Meetup-UK; Template:UK Wikipedia meetups; Wikipedia:Meetup/UK. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:18, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
amazing as usual @Redrose64:. see you in Oxford Whispyhistory (talk) 04:30, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Before meet up could you check St Clair Thomson. How to size signature. I have collected many more signatures to add once I know how to do it properly.ThxWhispyhistory (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Forget about using the full image syntax inside infoboxes. Just put the bare filename into the appropriate parameter, as in |signature=Signature ST Claire Thomson 1894, Royal Medical Chirurgical Society `obligation Book 1805.jpg --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Just seen the notice for the Oxford meetup this Sunday. I am due to arrive in Oxford by narrowboat on Saturday night & the two things just clicked so I may try to drop in. I don't know Oxford very well at all. but the public moorings seem to reasonably close.— Rod talk 18:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have to say that Rodw's casual I am due to arrive in Oxford by narrowboat on Saturday night is pretty much the Coolest Thing Out. Love it. :) DBaK (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
@Rodw: Will you be on the Oxford Canal? If so, its southern end (just north of Hythe Bridge, don't pass through Lock 46) is about 90 seconds walk from the meetup venue. Before the basin was filled in, and Nuffield College built on top, it was under ten seconds... --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks both. We will be travelling south on the Oxford. The aim is to moor in Oxford for a night before going onto the Thames, so hope to see you then.— Rod talk 05:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Template: WikiProject Women's sport[edit]

Hi RedRose64, can you push the edits made to Template: WikiProject Women's sport/sandbox live or let me know what needs to be modified. I made the changes you previously noted. Thank you for your assistance. Hmlarson (talk) 00:46, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Happy Birthday![edit]

Wikipe-tan Birthday.svg
Wishing Redrose64 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Slightlymad 04:21, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
@Slightlymad: Which birthday? Real-life, made first edit, or registered an account? But, it seems that I became an admin six years ago today. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Your assistance is requested[edit]

Hello R. I hope that you are well. Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/PH Games has shown up in the category. As it is fully protected I can't perform the necessaries to get it out. When you have a moment your help will be appreciated. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 13:33, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I gave it a WP:NULLEDIT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 13:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

New one[edit]

Hello again. Yesterday this Talk:History of computing in Romania was added to the cat. I tried null edits there, at the article where the info originated and at the template page. I also waited for a time to see if it would clear out on its own. I will be interested to learn what the solution is. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 17:38, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

It's because {{Attribution history}} has a {{pp}} which was put there by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs), presumably under the impression that all pages bearing this template would necessarily be protected. Of course, Talk:History of computing in Romania has never been protected. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look. I see the protection template in the editing field but I don't see a protection in the log for the template. Is that what is causing the problem? I also wonder if this hasn't shown up before because the template hadn't been used until a day ago. MarnetteD|Talk 22:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
It's nothing to do with protection of {{Attribution history}}: the {{pp}} is inside <includeonly>...</includeonly> so the protection that relates to this is that of the page where the template is transcluded - in this case, Talk:History of computing in Romania. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
I see R. Do you have any idea how to get that talk page out of the category? I always appreciate your taking the time to explain these things. Enjoy your week. MarnetteD|Talk 23:41, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Does the template need to have a <noinclude>...</noinclude> added in some fashion? I'm just throwing ideas out since - as you say the Talk:History of computing in Romania page has never been protected. Apologies if I am making things more confusing. MarnetteD|Talk 23:52, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
<noinclude>...</noinclude> has the opposite effect of <includeonly>...</includeonly> - if you put one inside the other, nothing is done. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. So is there anything that can be done to get that talk page out of the category? MarnetteD|Talk 12:14, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Adrian Vaughan[edit]

View east from the B4017 bridge at Steventon of the place where No. 6800 Arlington Grange was derailed
View west from the down main towards the B4017 bridge, and beyond that, Steventon station
View west, showing the accident location on the left

How reliable is Vaughan for dates of accidents etc? Signalman's Twilight pp100-05 refers. Can't find owt to back that one up. Mjroots (talk) 18:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Can't find my copy. What was the location, the circumstances? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:09, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
SPAD and derailment of freight at Foxhall Jn, Didcot, involving 6800 Arlington Grange, 21 September 1962. Express passenger stopped just short of obstruction. Mjroots (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) If you know what the local paper at the time was, they're usually a good bet; most of them are now archived online provided you have a UK library card, and anything that causes any kind of disruption almost always gets at least a brief mention in the local press complete with exact time and place. ‑ Iridescent 20:58, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
That's what is troubling me. The only accident I can find at that location was five years later, involving a passenger train that O. S. Nock was travelling on. Not a mention in The Times or at the Railways Archive website. Mjroots (talk) 07:50, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The only accident involving 6800 Arlington Grange that I recall reading about was not at Foxhall Junction (53 miles 55 chains from Paddington), but more than 2 12 miles to the west (between mileposts 56 14 and 56 12) at approximately 51°37′17″N 1°18′55″W / 51.62135°N 1.3152°W / 51.62135; -1.3152 near Steventon. To the east of Steventon station is a bridge (56 miles 39 chains) that nowadays carries the B4017 road over the railway, but at that time carried the A34 road; this bridge is only wide enough for two rail tracks (see second photo). To the east of the bridge there are points (56 miles 32 chains), and from there towards Milton (which was itself the site of an accident in 1955 just west of milepost 55 14), four tracks in cutting. Of these four tracks, the ones to consider are the down goods loop (DGL), which is the southernmost (rightmost in the first photo, leftmost in the third); and the down main (DM), which is the second from the south (second from right in the first photo, centre in second and third photos). The exit from the DGL is protected by trap points; these are visible in the first photo, exactly half-way down, directly below the pair of cooling towers; and in the third photo, on the left-hand track just beyond the signal gantry.
As I recall, 6800 was hauling a down train (not a passenger train - may have been goods, parcels or empties) on the DGL, and there was a down passenger train (either express or ordinary, I don't recall) on the DM. Since the passenger train had priority, the exit points were set for the DM, and the DM signals were clear; accordingly, the DGL signals were at danger and the trap points were set to divert any runaway from reaching the main line. The driver of 6800 mistook the DM signals for his own, and carried on through the trap points and was derailed into the side of the cutting.
I have studied this location many times: for the last two years, the bus that takes me to work goes over Steventon bridge, and the trap points at the end of the DGL are clearly visible. I must get a higher-resolution photo before the ongoing electrification work reduces the visibility of the site. Masts are already up ... --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:11, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
A lot of what you've put ties in. I'll need to carefully digest that chapter before I edit any articles to add in the accident. Mjroots (talk) 20:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


@Redrose64: Hi... can you advise what to do to correct reference 5 on History of Medicine Society. There is a lot of red writing.Whispyhistory (talk) 10:48, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I would like to award this[edit]

@Redrose64:, this is Navarre0107 (talk), I would like to thank you for fixing and greatly improving a template of my wikiproject, also, for your service, on behalf of my Wikipedia:WikiProject Navarre, Florida, I would like to award this service award:

NavarreBeachSignSpring.jpeg Wikipedians of Navarre Service Award
Awarded by a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Navarre, Florida, due to this user's service to aiding the advancement of Navarre, Florida, and its corresponding Wikipedia pages. Navarre0107 (talk) 15:30, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
You're Welcome :) --Navarre0107 (talk) 16:48, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Template transclusion limit exceeded on Grade II* listed buildings in South Somerset[edit]

Nice to meet you in Oxford last week. We were talking about the template transclusion limit being exceeded (or similar term) on Grade II* listed buildings in South Somerset and I'm sorry I didn't have tome to understand what you were saying about lua (or similar). There is an old discussion at Talk:Grade II* listed buildings in South Somerset#Content transclusion limit exceeded and I wondered if you had any more thoughts to add there about how to resolve the issue?— Rod talk 09:09, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

If you don't want to go as far as rewriting Template:English Heritage listed building row in Lua, there are two possible courses of action: either split down the article into even smaller areas; or consider removing one or two items of information from every row. Regarding the latter method, two that spring to mind are:
  1. Is it necessary to have both grid reference and coordinates?
  2. Is a separate reference necessary when the entry number links through to what should be a reliable source? By removing the |reference= parameter from every row, that will eliminate 250+ instances of {{cite web}}; the column itself may be hidden by altering all instances of |show_ref=yes to |show_ref=no in the {{EH listed building header}} and all the rows.
On the matter of grid refs, these seem somewhat overprecise - they have two letters and ten figures: this is one-metre precision. Note that reducing the precision to perhaps 10 metres (8 figures) will not affect the template limits at all. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:05, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


Hi RedRose, Hope all is well,
Inregards to the RFC - If his name is on more than one news cite and even features on a news clip on his own YouTube video then how can it still be considered outing ?, I can kinda see the logic in the OUTING thing but at the same time he's still releasing name on both things here so I kinda don't ... makes a whole heap of sense!,
Anyway sorry I'm not great when it comes to this sort of thing and would rather get a better understanding first,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 23:17, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Newton dale Halt[edit]

Hi Redrose 64; regarding this diff [2] I was trying to say that the name was changed and is now listed on their websites as being different to the actual name of the station. It didn't come off very well and I appreciate that on balance, what I was saying was wrong and I thank you for being the guiding hand in these matters. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 09:06, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Class 153 DMU[edit]

Dear Redrose64 I have been trying to correct mistakes relating to Class 153s but my corrections are being rejected. I'm no expert on Wikipedia, but I am THE authority on Class 153. I was the Works Manager and Project Manager for the fleet of Class 153. They were converted by Leyland Bus at the Workington Plant. Please will you help putting these corrections onto the record. Thanks in anticipation. John WoodJwoch (talk) 10:56, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

In case Redrose has forgotten, he explained to you in crystal clear terms in response to your message at User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 17#British Rail Class 153 that your personal recollections are of no use to Wikipedia. Verifiability requires published reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:00, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Jwoch: I explained this when you posted here before (at least twice). Although the threads are no longer on this page, one of them is now archived at User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 17#British Rail Class 153.
To repeat: personal knowledge does not satisfy either the policy on verifiability or the policy on original research, and may also go against the policy on neutrality. Since you clearly have a conflict of interest, you must not add the information to the articles yourself.
If you wish the articles to be amended, first find some reliable third-party sources, such as the specialist railway press - publications like Modern Railways or Railway Magazine are good; these are likely to have had detailed articles about the design, tendering, ordering, construction and delivery of these trains. Once these sources are identified, start a discussion on the talk pages for the articles: Talk:Sprinter (train) and Talk:British Rail Class 153. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:07, 25 October 2017 (UTC)


As you're probably aware, I've expanded the Challow station article. The Railways Archive website mentions an accident on 29 April 1872. The Times draws a blank. As it's your patch, maybe you can find some info in your local library. Mjroots (talk) 19:19, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Alerts question[edit]

There were a couple of occasions where women-related articles at AfD were not listed in the Alert section at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. I don't know why the BOT didn't pick them up, but the most recent example is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joy Ballard. I guess I could post it to the project TP but if there's a way to fix the issue, that may be a better route. I just happened across this one because I was reviewing AfD this evening. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Atsme📞📧 04:05, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@Atsme: The alert section being Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Article alerts, which is updated based upon the entry at Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscription list#W. This shows
which indicates that for the AFD to be selected for listing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Article alerts, an article's talk page either needs to carry {{WIR}} (or one of its redirects), or be in Category:All WikiProject Women in Red pages. Talk:Joy Ballard has neither of these. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Perfect! Thank you! Atsme📞📧 12:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry about the screw-ups, and thank you for helping me to better understand how the process works. Atsme📞📧 02:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


Dear Redrose64. I hope I have found an acceptable amendment wording by explaining the contractual chain Regards JW Jwoch (talk) 20:33, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@Jwoch: What does this have to do with article alerts? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:55, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

re: your persistent removal of my rfc[edit]

citing an "essay" is NOT a valid rationale for this action.

if we are doing that, i refer you to the wheaton rule? :)

Lx 121 (talk) 16:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@Lx 121: I did not remove your RFC - I removed the {{rfc}} template; there is a difference. Also, WP:RFC is not an "essay", it is agreed and established procedure for how to conduct a Request for Comment. I urge you once again to look carefully at Talk:Cultural appropriation#NNPOV and consider my points, in particular, why is "Unsorted" present five times? Have you not read either WP:RFC or the documentation for {{rfc}}? What on earth is the "wheaton rule"?
Finally: please consider WP:NPA and think very carefully about what you wrote here. Looking at User talk:Lx 121, I see that there have been concerns about your editing going back almost ten years. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
1, "I did not remove your RFC - I removed the {{rfc}} template" - that has got to be right up there with "guns don't kill people, people kill people" in terms of its logic & reasoning. HOW EXACTLY do you see an "rfc" going forward, if you remove the rfc tag? how is an rfc supposed to occur after you do that? because, last time i checked, the tags were pretty darned important to getting the c's to your r.
2, as i said elsewhere, since the template does not include a list of the topic "codes" to choose from, & since i did not know them, & could not find such a list, by reasonable effort, i simply put the appropriate words in english; assuming, that some rfc-specialist editor acting in good faith would correct & categorise them as necessary. i cannot believe that every single other editor who seeks an rfc has had perfect knowledge of the correct codes, every time, so i would expect the rfc "working group" to be prepared for such contingencies. if you feel bothered by this lack, & since you are knowledgible about the subject, , why don't you add the "correct" letter combinations to make the codes to properly categorise it? instead of deleting the rfc x2.
3, which you cited as 1/2 your rationale for deleting the rfc, most certainly is an "essay", & therefore not "wp"; & i do not see anything on the other linked oage, that justifies arbitrarily removing another editor's rfc tag? or rather i do not see any cases that would apply here? please clarify which item you are using to justify this action?
4, thus far, you have not had anything to say about the points actually raised in the rfc, so if you disagree with me, why don't you post your reasoning there? & since we are now "sniffing" each other's past records, yes, i have been editing wikipedia for over ten years, & i've got a pretty damned decent record of quality work; & i am quite sure that if i could be bothered to hunt through your contrib history & talkpage history, i could find plenty of people who have disagreed with you, also? :) if that is the basis for judging the validity of one another's arguements, then we are all in trouble. & this place has never really fixed the problem of declining editor numbers...
5, you can go look up the "wheaton rule" for yourself, or not, wp:idc. there used to be an article about it, but i stopped keeping track of stupid/pointless/"bad" deletions & merges; it was too depressing.
Lx 121 (talk) 07:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
The topic codes most definitely are listed in the template, at Template:Rfc#Definition of topic areas; the're also listed in the RFC guidance page, at WP:RFC#Categories. The prefix "WP:" is simply shorthand for "Wikipedia:" namespace, it applies to any page in that namespace, whatever its status. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:52, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Escher comment on Liverpool St station[edit]

Hi... I've reverted your revert as it appears to be based on a misunderstanding. I made no mention of Escher anywhere in my edit. Can I ask how he is related to your edit? --Rebroad (talk) 09:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@Rebroad: I didn't revert because of any mention of M. C. Escher; I reverted because it's not as as suitable as the established lead image. I mentioned Escher because your preferred image shows heavy distortion that is characteristic of Escher's work, in which impossible staircases feature prominently. You have now attempted six times to get this image into Liverpool Street station and have been reverted by various people, myself included:
So I am not the only one to revert you; by the third revert, you should have realised that you have little (or no) support for your preferred image. In fact, since the image was first uploaded on 24 October 2015, nobody has added your preferred image to the article apart from yourself, and you have never justified its inclusion by, for example, starting a discussion on the article's talk page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png A cookie for being awesome! SwaggerKing32 (talk) 04:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:40, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


Hi, Redrose 64,

Do you have any idea about why the ''done'' template does not transclude at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive 24?Regards:)Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 13:41, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

It's because ClueBot III (talk · contribs) inserts tl| so that  Done becomes {{done}}. I don't know why; you'd need to ask the botop. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:46, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks:) Have asked Cobi about the issue! And hope you do not mind my occasional pestering about technical issues etc. Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 15:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


Hello, Redrose64. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Muzammil (talk) 18:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

@Hindustanilanguage: I don't discuss Wikipedia matters off-wiki, except at organised meetups, such as m:Meetup/Oxford/3 which was the only time that I am certain that I met JohnCD (talk · contribs) in person. There were so many new faces that day that I don't remember them all. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:15, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


Good day Redrose64, I replaced the logo for the Eastern Cape Kings in September 2017 here File:Eastern_Provings_Kings_logo.svg, but see the PNG logo is still on the server here File:Eastern_Province_Kings_logo.png. Can you please delete the PNG file which is not being used? Redards (Vectorebus (talk) 12:33, 19 November 2017 (UTC))

Update: I realized the PNG file wasn't deleted because the new SVG file had a spelling mistake. I corrected this and the redundant PNG file should expire now. (Vectorebus (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC))
@Vectorebus: Put {{db-author}} on the ones that you don't want; more at WP:CSD#G7. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)