User talk:Fairfielder1920

Alvis 12/50

You have put a photograph on this page without any information about the vehicle in it. Please would you supply this information. Without that info it should not have that prominence, or really, be displayed at all. This is an encyclopaedia not an uninformative photo gallery. Thank you. Eddaido (talk) 11:28, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are referring to the picture within the info box at the head of the page? There is no facility for adding a display caption to this image, but if you click on it there is an informative caption. The picture was very carefully chosen, as an improvement on the picture previously occupying that spot. It is the classic 12/50, and the pictured car is one of the earliest, and most original. My work on this page has not been in the nature of an 'uninformative picture gallery', as a glance at my edits should show.Fairfielder1920 (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you would provide full information about the car in your picture I will fix the rest. If you don't know the kind of info required look at the images on that page, please. Eddaido (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the caption I wrote for the picture: "1923 SA 12/50 with original Super Sports (duck's back) body by Carbodies."Fairfielder1920 (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I've put it below the picture. I have also re-arranged the pictures to a more conventional layout and removed surplus words from the other captions and tried to note where information is lacking. I don't share your enthusiasm for the car in the photo, looks to me like assembled in Hollywood for an episode of the Simpsons but I am no Alvis or Carbodies expert. I expect you would like to debate all this further. We are required to do that on the talk page at the back of the article. If you'd like to do that - let me know. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 10:21, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have made a few corrections, and altered the subheads (it is not as straightforward as 'S series' and T series' for a number of reasons, unfortunately!). I have also swapped the header picture for another shot of the same car, which shows the pointed tail a bit better. Sorry you don't like it - it is rather ugly with the hood up, but it is the archetypal 12/50. Re the missing info for the SD 12/50, I cannot fill in the coach builder, as I am not sure that this is an original body. I may replace this picture in due course.Fairfielder1920 (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fairfielder please would you glance at this page Talk:Alvis 12/50. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Road tests and things, more info

If you are in the UK and belong to a local library you should be able to access for no charge and from your own home archived copies of The Times (from 1785 to 2010). I have checked and on top of good descriptions of the 12-50 cars when they were first available there are road tests. I like the road tests because they show how cars were regarded at the time they were on the market. The Times man can be blunt if does not like something about a car! If you signed in to Wikipedia and opened your user page and set the preferences so that you would receive an email from me (we each would have blind addresses that need not identify us) then I can email you scans of the articles concerned. The Times motoring correspondent liked his Alvises. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 04:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts (April 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Fairfielder1920, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts (April 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion pending for File:The Bleddfa Centre.jpg

Hello, Fairfielder1920. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:The Bleddfa Centre.jpg — was tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.

If you have not submitted (or forwarded) a statement of permission, please send it immediately to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 14:41, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts

Hello, Fairfielder1920. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. 1989 (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts (April 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Yashovardhan Dhanania was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Especially the history and a couple following sections need to be rewritten. Could also benefit from all major leading publications for sources

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Yashovardhan (talk) 11:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts (July 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chris troutman was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chris Troutman (talk) 18:39, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts

Hello, Fairfielder1920. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bleddfa Centre for the Creative Arts".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. HasteurBot (talk) 09:06, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]