User talk:7severn7

Welcome!

Hello, 7severn7, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, 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! - Erebus555 14:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

signatures

Hey 7severn7, you don't need to sign your name to posts in articles, just posts on talk pages. Thanks for your contributions. Cheers!--Kchase T 10:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Many thanks for the pointers. As a newbie I'm sure to foul up even more.--7severn7 08:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wareham Station

Just wanted to say how much I liked your replacement of my speculation about the future plans of the Swanage Railway in this article with a note about their aspirations. Much better way of saying the same thing but without falling foul of the Not A Crystal Ball constraint, as I did. Thanks! Britmax 21:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure--7severn7 20:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question marks

Hi. Thanks for the contributions you've been making to railway articles. Just a couple of things: if there's something you're not quite sure about (e.g. the year when New Hadley Halt closed), it's best not to add it at all, or just be vague and add as much as you know, for instance say "in the 1970s" instead of "197?". Also, if it's a really short article which needs expanding, perhaps a suitable stub template. Just to let you know. --RFBailey 19:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there RFBailey. Thanks for the tips. I started out as a complete newbie and I am now just beginning to get the hang of all this stuff. --7severn7 20:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steam loco components

I note your additions to the "Steam locomotive components" page, but did you mean to add them to the top section where they become numbered 35 and 36 but don't reference labeled parts on the diagram? I have been working on an improved component diagram, see Talk:Steam_locomotive_components, comments? --AGoon 21:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reviving the railways

7severn7, i'm wondering how would i create or find tables. on a lot of pages (use Didcot as an example) they have info boxes about the town. how would i create a template for railway stations, that conveys as much info as possible. i'm about to start the process of creating articles of railway stations that have been closed down (thank u doctor beeching). starting off with oxfordshire, and working my way slowly around the country, sayin who built what, when, where, who took it over, why it closed. needing a bit of help, i got the info, just not the understanding of how to use this site properly.

also, would love to know, if there is an english article, how would i create a version in another language that is linked? say a spanish version of bristol temple meads?--Halowithhorns89 16:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

preview

When you edit a text you find a "show preview" button below the text window. Please use it to verify your edits before you use the button "save page". You will thus produce lesser garbage in the article history. --SonniWP 20:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. As they say "More haste, less speed". 7severn7 (talk) 19:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Telford Steam Railway

Hi 7severn7, could I ask you to stop adding speculation about the future of Coalbrookdale station to the Telford Steam Railway article? While I appreciate your attempt to source it, the document you provided is clearly marked as withdrawn. It also doesn't specifically mention Coalbrookdale station, therefore you cannot use it to source your addition - that would be synthesis which is not allowed. Unless you have a (current) independent, published source that describes the specific issue at Coalbrookdale station, you cannot include this information in the TSR article. Thanks, Gwernol 10:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gwernol If you knew the incline (approximately 1 in 100) that Coalbrookdale stands on you would be more inclined to agree with me. I have now found the current Rail Safety and Standards Board document at GI/RT7016 within http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/docushare/dsweb/ApplySearch Which clear states, with caveats for existing stations, that platforms shall be located on track no steeper than an average of 1 in 500. It would be very unusual in the UK for a derogation to be applied for a new station. This would be applied even more stringently where rolling stock is vacuum braked.7severn7 (talk) 21:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I was well aware of the steepness of the gradient involved before reviewing your edits. Please do not assume bad faith of me, nor continue to make personal attacks and implied smears on my editing or level of knowledge. Please address the issues involved, specifically that you cannot drawn your own conclusions from primary sources, per [WP:OR]]. Thanks, Gwernol 13:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My userpage

Please don't edit my userpage; doing so is a form of vandalism. How do you presume to know what my to do list is? Gwernol 13:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hest Bank North Junction

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hest Bank North Junction, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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.

See also the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Articles on Railway Junctions — Pek, on behalf of Tivedshambo (talk) 08:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hest Bank South Junction has also been proposed for deletion. — Pek, on behalf of Tivedshambo (talk) 09:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:Buildwas railway station 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Buildwas railway station 1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 00:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Highley Station views.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Highley Station views.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 02:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Buildwas railway station 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Buildwas railway station 1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 11:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Highley Station views.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Highley Station views.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 11:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Jackfield Halt 1952.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jackfield Halt 1952.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 12:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Highley Station views.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Highley Station views.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 13:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Highley_footbridge.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Highley_footbridge.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 21:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Highley Station views.jpg

Hello! I saw that you had problems with a bot about this image. You said that the copyright of this image had expired. When this image was taken? How old are it? You can all available tags at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. For now, I inserted the tag {{Non-free historic image}} to prevent this image being deleted for not having a copyright tag. Have good edits! Regards, Sdrtirs (talk) 01:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:Jackfield Halt 1952.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jackfield Halt 1952.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 17:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TSR

Could I ask you again to refrain from adding unsourced suprious information the the TSR page? You seem to be attempting a bold ford across Wikipedia's ethos of accurate reporting. Your help on the history of the line was much appreciated, could you continue in that vein perhaps? WaltTFB (talk) 17:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What can I add without risking banning from Wikipedia????Green Gronk (talk) 01:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At one time there was a change in the up/down direction at Lightmore Junction. I.e. At one time you went up towards Madeley Junction and up towards Buildwas. The most recent change in declared direction means the whole line between Madeley Junction and Buildwas is now consistent. Green Gronk, you seem to object to some interesting facts being included in the history of an otherwise humdrum line.7severn7 (talk) 08:27, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BR Standard Class 6

"Steel cylinders"? Can you expand on that at all? Presumably this was the use of a stronger cast steel alloy (and thus presumably thinner / lighter) rather than the cheaper grey cast iron usually used. Was this related to the 19&frac; diameter, mid-way between the 7s and the 5s on what was otherwise the same motion? Why was it done - purely to reduce the 6's weight? Do we know by how much?

My main concern is that someone unfamiliar with metallurgy is likely to be confused by this and see "steel" as a redundancy, "Hey dude, aren't they like all made of steel? Duh!!" and then remove it. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the BR standard locomotive classes were fitted with cast iron cylinders and others were fitted with cast steel carrying cast iron liners. I hope that clears things up. 7severn7 (talk) 08:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PH

For your information Mr Boldford, I'm not Paul Hughes, Chairman of Telford Steam Railway, I have a feeling he will confirm that next time you speak to him in your capacity as one of the directors of the Ironbridge Railway Trust. WaltTFB (talk) 11:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

–Signalhead ^< T > 21:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Electrification of the Chiltern Main Line

Hey. I was interested to read the small addition you made to Chiltern Main Line about Adrian Shooter expecting the line to be electrified in the foreseeable future. However it's not referenced so could you please tell me where you found that out! It's great news if he has said that. Thanks. Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 19:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Scott bader

A tag has been placed on Scott bader requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. TheDude2006 (talk) 21:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries (again)

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

–Signalhead ^< T > 16:18, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kitmaster

Re the paragraphs on Kitmaster kits that you've added to various loco articles - I know that they're mostly (if not all) true, but others might not, and could potentially revert you for adding unsourced statements. Thus, per WP:V, please make sure that you add references, to save me having to hunt them down on your behalf. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from the above: the refs that you have added to various articles, such as here; I don't think that all the page numbers given are relevant to the events described; conversely, I don't think that all relevant page numbers have been given within the ref. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gartsherrie East Junction

The article Gartsherrie East Junction has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
Gartsherrie East Junction – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} 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. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lego

Please read the last section of the talk page for that article. Those videos do not clearly indicate that the bricks in question are Lego bricks. All a direct viewing of the clip can tell is that they are bricks that look like Legos. Thus, that info cannot remain in the Lego article. If you disagree, please discuss on talk; do not re-add the info to the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Grand Junction, Birmingham, England

The article Grand Junction, Birmingham, England has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
Grand Junction, Birmingham, England – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} 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. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Highley footbridge.jpg

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

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

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Highley Station views.jpg

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

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

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 28

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited East coast joint stock, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Great Northern Railway and North Eastern Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

East Coast Joint Stock

Hi, you don't need to keep thanking me for this edit. I make it three times so far. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:31, 26 November 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) 16:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, 7severn7. 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 2017 election voter message

Hello, 7severn7. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 7severn7. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 7severn7. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of BRSLOG

The article BRSLOG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN group, fails the GNG and WP:ORG. ZERO substantive coverage in reliable sources found. Article has never been sourced, and notability tagged for over a decade.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Ravenswing 14:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Weaver Junction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Weaver Junction 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/Weaver Junction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 17:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Worting Junction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Worting Junction 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/Worting Junction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 17:44, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Aynho Junction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aynho Junction 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/Aynho Junction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 17:47, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hest Bank North Junction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hest Bank North Junction 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/Hest Bank North Junction (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 17:57, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hest Bank South Junction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hest Bank South Junction 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/Hest Bank South Junction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Southall East Junction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Southall East Junction 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/Southall East Junction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:10, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Grand Junction, Birmingham for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grand Junction, Birmingham 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/Grand Junction, Birmingham until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Madeley Junction, Shropshire

The article Madeley Junction, Shropshire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

None of the sources give any real detail about the junction itself, mostly talking about the signal box (which realistically will not be notable at all) - proposing deletion for this reason.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Lord Belbury (talk) 16:41, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Severn Valley Venturer

The article Severn Valley Venturer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Clearly fails WP:GNG, one very outdated source to attempt to support it but no indication of a good number of secondary sources to make it notable enough for Wikipedia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 04:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]