User talk:Zabdiel

HOn3

I have reverted your change of the redirect. The two gauges are entirely different. HOn3 is modelling 3' gauge railways on 10.5mm gauge track, while HOm is modelling metre (3'3") gauge railways on 12mm gauge track. HOn3 prototypes are normally North American, while HOm prototypes are usually European. --Michael Johnson 05:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! I realised that one was metre gauge and one was 3' gauge - however I didn't realise they used different track gauges. I should check these things better before I do them. Thanks for sorting it out --Zabdiel 08:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WikiProject Trains

Hello and welcome to the Trains WikiProject! Thank you for adding your name to our project membership list. Our goal is to build the most comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. As a project member, you may add the project membership userbox to your user page if you wish.

If you haven't done so already, please add our main project page to your watchlist and take some time to review the Trains project manual of style where we have collected guidelines and suggestions on notability and style for a consistent representation of rail transport related material. If you're curious about where to start, we've gathered a few suggestions in the Trains project to do list. If you'd like to specialize in a particular area of study within rail transport, take a look at the current Trains project task forces.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the project talk page or on my talk page. Again, welcome and happy editing! Slambo (Speak) 13:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHR and Ffestiniog templates

Thanks for creating the WHR navbox template - you beat me to it by a few days, as I was planning to do so myself. I created {{Corris Railway}} the other day, and have just created one for the Ffestiniog - {{Ffestiniog Railway}}. Perhaps you'd like to look at it and see if you can suggest any alterations or omissions before I roll it out onto the relevant articles. — Tivedshambo _(t/c) 16:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Corris & Ffestiniog templates look good. Thanks for fixing up the problems with my template, I knew it probably would be perfect when I added it but guessed someone would know what needed changing. I've added a "Rolling Stock" section and re-ordered the sections in line with the other nav-boxes. Feel free to make any other change you think of. Zabdiel (talk) 10:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Festiniog V Ffestiniog

Here we go again.......... (OH, just to place on record, I am English not welsh

This is a never ending story - as bad as the background on the WHR itself (current and historical)

I have corrected the WHR article notes reference. For a start the first sentence was totally wrong.

The spelling of local place names has changed during the history of the railway, for example Ffestiniog was generally spelled as "Festiniog" when the Ffestiniog Railway was built

The welsh language, and writings existed a long time before the railways arrived, even before Madocks arrived in the area. The WELSH always spelt it Ffestiniog, it was the english cartographers that changed things - and somewhat not consistently from some evidence! The changes back to he proper Welsh spellings is a result of the "Cymru am Byth" movment in the sixties, which forced the Govt to accept the rights the welsh people had (it had been going on for some time).

Blaenau Festiniog is a curious point, and this is based on my own interpretation from different sources. It didnt exist until after 1800 (cannot remember dates). Small collection of huts - "Seven Sisters" comes to mind as being the area. town created from this for workforce in Slate quarries. Got name (single F cos quarry owners were English) - converted to FF sometime later half of 20th Century! Llan Ffestiniog, a mile away, has been 2F all the time. (Thats very potted and without references)

As for the use of 1 or 2 for the railway - who now cares, except for die hards, and people who get annoyed at being told what is right when it isnt.

DONT TAKE THIS WRONG WAY!!!. This arguement came up on the FR entry. I am just putting another case. Festiniog Railway has operated continually from 1836. The Ffestiniog Railway is a creation of the 1980's.

--Keith 00:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHR References

Just noted the restoration of the ref on this file - no problem as such but a query Do you have a copy of this book by Julian Holland. - I dont. I beleive it covers the whole of the UK (and from one right up may be furher afield) as opposed to any railway in particular. I find it strange that "Boyd", i.e. the first entry in Bibliography section, is generally regarded as the base for most research and does not appear to be used for any reference and first appeared 35+ years ago (my copy for WHR, dated 1970's). I wouldnt be surprised if Hollands tome actually made use of this work.

In fact - a technicality - I would even go as far as to say 3 of the 4 entries that supposedly use Holland as reference, appeared in 2006 on this page - the year before the book was actually published. Strange isnt it!! - but suppose its better than quoting a local newspaper that hasnt got its facts right!!! Keith 13:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a copy but it's available on google books. Here's the page about the WHR. It only has one page about the WHR but there's no reason to suppose that it's inaccurate.

I don't think any of the books in the bibliography section have been used for in line references - though I'd guess most of them have been used in creating the article. I don't have copies of any of them though. Zabdiel (talk) 13:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Zabdiel.  I wrote 3 para reply, but have rewritten this here
use the history to see what I mean - looks a bit repetitive

Sorry, there was no intention to question the validity of the Holland material, as at that time I hadnt seen it. Thanks to you pointer, I now have.

Its just it being used as source of references - before it was published, and having looked at the half paragraph entry makes me laugh as it being cited as a reference. There is no information there! It is published, yes, and can therefore be cited, yes. Fufils Trident13's requirement for citations, yes. Provides any useful information other than what has been used, NO! There is the small error of the ""first phase being from Caernarfon to Rhyd Ddu"". What about Phases 2 and 3 which accounted for 5 years of construction?!.

And yet the main source of info for the whole area, Boyd, available for over 35 years, has not been used. It is still regarded with some esteem given his place in the early welsh preservation movement, and used as a base point for other publications.

So given this, I had second thoughts about the usage of the Holland reference. A half page page entry in what liiks like an A5 size book is hardly a source for reference material. I have pulled the Boyd Bible out (to get correct info) and amended to show that as source for the same material. Not surprisingly much of the other historical material quoted here is also in Boyd. The copy I have (1972) is 380 pages and only covers the WHR/FR area (Croesor, Gorseddau, PBSSR &etc,) Keith 18:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool - much better to have some references from a book about Welsh narrow gauge rather than random railway facts. I noticed that a couple of Boyd's books are referenced rather a lot in the Talyllyn Railway article which has featured article status. Zabdiel (talk) 19:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SKLR

I've updated the article and rewritten it for tense. Let me know if you have any concerns or I have missed something. Mjroots (talk) 15:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Convert

Re: Talk:Talyllyn Railway#Metric gauge 2 feet 3 inches (690 mm). The way to solve the problem is thus in all cases: 2 ft 3 in (686 mm) or 2 feet 3 inches (686 mm). More examples: 2 ft 4 in (711 mm) and 2 ft 4+1⁄2 in (724 mm). The key here is "|0". Template:RailGauge 28 (Snailbeach District Railways) does exist, 28.5 or28+1/2 (Glyn Valley Tramway) does not. Peter Horn User talk 21:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Using your Pics

Zab,

Notice you are not on main wiki these days, but would like to use [:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nant_Gwynant_power_station.jpg] on another site here- credit given as per usual. I appreciate its on Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License, but my courtesy demands I inform you directly as well. please contact direct at [email:enquiries@welshhighlandheritage.co.uk]

Notice of deletion request

Hi. I have tagged some of your 00-scale images for deletion as I believe they fall under derivative works of copyrighted toys. Please see Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Category:OO Scale of you wish to comment on the deletion. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :)

Thank you for the pic Jeepday (talk) 20:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Master Patient Index

The article Master Patient Index has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Adds no additional information not already covered in the more in-depth article Enterprise_Master_Patient_Index

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 03:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joiners Arms for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joiners Arms is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 19:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Micronetics Standard MUMPS

The article Micronetics Standard MUMPS has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, tagged as technical since May 2013, refimprove since June 2009 and Orphan since Nov 2006

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mdann52 (talk) 12:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zabdiel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This Is Our Christmas Album moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, This Is Our Christmas Album, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:This Is Our Christmas Album

Hello, Zabdiel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:This Is Our Christmas Album, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:This Is Our Christmas Album

Hello, Zabdiel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "This Is Our Christmas Album".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]