Jump to content

User talk:Csharpmar/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

File:EastWestRailServiceMap.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:EastWestRailServiceMap.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Majora (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Your drawing [which is a route map, not a services table] fails to show Bletchley, an important planned stop, and shows incorrectly that the Bicester-Bedford route connects with and runs briefly via the WCML. It does not, in fact it crosses over the WCML at high level. [The drawing at http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/east-west-rail-route/ is misleading]. As of February 2018, there is no south<->west chord [EUS-OXF; though the land for one remains vacant] nor more importantly a north<->east chord [MKC-BED; the land is currently occupied by low-value trade outlets]. The west <-> north route exists on the east side of the flyover. So whilst there may be an MKC-OXF service, there won't be an MKC-BED service without expensive engineering works. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@John Maynard Friedman: Sorry, if you wish to modify it, please feel free. If you want the original illustrator or SVG file, I will link it. Many thanks Csharpmar (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I don't have Illustrator [or any halfway decent drawing package]. I would if I could but I can't. Meanwhile, I seriously believe that the file should be reverted because it is just so wrong. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@John Maynard Friedman:If you want to remove the image from any pages it may appear on (East West Rail Link, Didcot Parkway) please feel free. But if you could tell be what you think needs doing to it(Eg. Graying out lines, removing lines), I will have a go at doing it and re upload it. Many thanks Csharpmar (talk) 06:25, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The only real showstopper is the absence of Bletchley. You need to show a simple cross rather than a staggered junction. Showing the station might be a bit complicated though: a tube map would show a circle on each line with a [pedestrian] connection between them but then you'd have to revise the way that all the stations are drawn. (There is a fairly high probability of EWRL flying over the ECML south of Bedford too but that can't be shown yet. However the design should facilitate it being added later). I think you should also lose the "non-stop section" annotations since (a) it adds inessential clutter and (b) it offends wp: crystal. If you include any of the minor stations you really have to include all of them, so maybe just lose them? The express Oxbridge service will only stop at Bicester, Bletchley, Bedford and Sandy.
Up to you of course but I'm afraid if it had been my idea I'd give up and do a link to the map on the EWR site. Also, it is not obvious to me what this diagram adds over template:East West Rail Link. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
@John Maynard Friedman: When I can find some time, I will implement most of your suggested changes, and remove the non stop sections, and provide a note stating that not all stations shown. The template you linked to is an overview of the sections, not proposed services, by the consortium. Many thanks, Csharpmar (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm now confused. It seems that you really do mean services, not routes. I don't really understand how what is essentially a route diagram can convey that information (as opposed to, for example, a "summary of services" as is typical of all station articles). Before you spend more time on it, could you explain how you see it working? Because it is not at all obvious at the moment. Thank you.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:41, 28 February 2018 (UTC) Also in your diagram, would you clarify whether "interchange" means "passenger interchange" or "track interchange" [a junction]. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: If it where a route diagram, there would be no need to put Reading and Didcot on it. By interchange, I mean passenger interchange (I will make this clear on the next revision), if there are any you think need to be removed or added, just let me know. I feel so stupid for missing out Bletchley, thank you for pointing it out to me. Csharpmar (talk) 16:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I see what you mean re Reading. Even so, it is a novel approach... If I were you, I'd run it past Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains before doing more work on it as it would be a pity if the regulars disagree with it [mine is an occasional interest which might explain why it seems odd to me]. As for overlooking Bletchley, it's a common local complaint! Of course I never make mistakes, if you ignore my putting Bedford on the ECML above when actually it is the MLML! [Though in fact a similar flyover solution is expected at Sandy and the station itself will have to be relocated]. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:40, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Route number, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages M25 and A1 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:29, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Done Csharpmar (talk) 13:36, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Bad Editor

Edits random pages and when someone tries to fix it lies about false information. Parker03892 (talk) 22:39, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

You replaced the birth place of Jacob Batalon to "Africa, Africa, U.S." It is uncited and you can't have a contienent within a continent. If you are going to criticise, don't just make it up, and cite your sources. Many thanks Csharpmar (talk) 22:44, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Archive 1

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Mz7 (talk) 20:00, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, following a review of your contributions, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please take note of the following:

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

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) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Csharpmar/Archive_1&oldid=1196537267"