User talk:J3Mrs/Archive 2

DYK for James Wood (minister)

On June 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article James Wood (minister), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Horwich Town Council

I thought I'd let you known I've created the Horwich Town Council article. I'd say it is a good Start-Class, but hope to get it to C-Class status. I know some of the sections could be expanded, but will do for the time being. You've done a number of edits to the Horwich and I'm sure you would like to include a brief paragraph somewhere about Horwich Town Council council and a wikilink to it page. As I said in another post on my user page, at the moment I'm getting together information in Word for the Horwich page, but it is all just draft bits and pieces and needs polishing up. – HLE (talk) 15:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff, work it into Governance somewhere. It would make a DYK with the twinning thing! I've got the Listed buildings in User:J3Mrs/sandbox3. I need to fill out the descriptions and then I'll roll it out. I'm very pleased that I've found so many images. Have a look back at Rivington today, a new editor decided to enlarge all the pics and got rid of the Demography section. I hope you've kept a check on my Horwich edits as it's tested all my comprehension skills unravelling it. I moved Bolton Arena there, is that correct? --J3Mrs (talk) 17:03, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I linked it, and also to the Metropolitan Borough of Bolton‎, and I took the liberty of putting the Charter in a box. Hope you approve, if not judt undo it.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the edit about the Town Charter. I have a small screen with the resolution at 1024 x 768. I tried to put the Town Charter in a box when I was creating the article, but in the preview it just didn't look good. Thanks for having a go at improving the article. In answer to your question about Bolton Arena, it is just outside of Horwich's civil parish boundary. It is the same with Reebok Stadium and Horwich Parkway railway station, they too are just outside of Horwich's boundaries. It is very confusing with half of Middlebrook, Greater Manchester in Horwich and the other half in Lostock. But the Royal Mail has all the addresses there under the Horwich postal locality in the BL postal area. – HLE (talk) 21:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I've linked it hope the link's ok--J3Mrs (talk) 21:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The links to Horwich Town Council work fine. Thanks. – HLE (talk) 22:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shaws

Hi you asked me a question somewhere, now I cannot find where about the History of a Lancashire Family, Shaw, yes its a book, I think it should be at Bolton Library if not its for sure at Preston. I have the authors copy here and he made a great number of alterations the copy I have has not yet been published, but the previous has.

regards --Rovington (talk) 03:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This weblink from "Copac National, Academic, and Specialist Library Catalogue" may be of use here. It shows the author's name, book title, publisher, etc. From that information I've created this citation for the book: Shaw, Ronald Cunliffe (1940), The Records of a Lancashire Family from the XIIth to the XXth Century. [On the Shaw family. With plates and genealogical tables.], Preston: Guardian Press. Being an older book it does not have an ISBN number. – HLE (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sherlock Holmes!!! It was for Rovington who has deleted all his stuff!. I've been salvaging the Rivington stuff as he now says it's a copy violation to use his. Hey ho. There's plenty to do now, if only he'd used proper references (and book refs) instead of his website.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you have plenty to do and yes I cited many books. If the articles are rewritten in your own words then there is no need to attribute. As you may know my site was created 1996, its public online archive is between 2002 and 2005, its entire archive is backed up on CDs from 1996. Where exactly do you feel you had prior authorship? If you can point me to the text that would be helpful, I am sure you undertand the serious nature of your suggestion. I appreciate the assistance over the meaning of the name Ruhwinton and the advice to change the wording re Ruhwinton on my site, which I did, however I am not aware of any other part of my site that derives from your research. Feel free to check against the waybackmachine for comparison and please send me an email with comments if you find anything. When posting in wikipedia it is a public forum - laws the same as printed matter apply, as with an article on a living person. In the articles I had ported from my site they were added with rights reserved, attributation as part of the license. On articles where you have done a complete rewrite in your own words the text would not need to be there to attribute, however it does otherwise and the note should not be removed. Removal of the text is a breach --Rovington (talk) 21:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again Rovington I am not sure what you mean. You are quite at liberty to add anything from Wikipedia to your site. I have NOT used your site to reference anything I have written on here and won't be doing so. I use independent sites and books with proper citations and page numbers when I use them, there are plenty of them about. If you see anything else to remove please do, and I will do the same.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Listed buildings in Rivington

Thanks for your query. I'm replying here in case anyone else wants to comment, and it will keep the discussion in one place. It's an impressive piece of work and IMO not far from FL quality. The format developed as a result of lengthy discussions at FLC with Listed buildings in Runcorn (urban area); but it works, and I now use it as a standard. In fact it's made me look at some of the lists I've developed, and I've found some glitches in these lists, which I must rectify. A few suggestions:

You've done some excellent work on making the Date column sort, but there are still some that do not work; try it and you'll see the ones I mean.
The Location column; is there any point in making that sortable? This column was used in the Runcorn list when areas of Runcorn were included. But without the inclusion of areas, there seems to be little point in making it sortable; indeed I wonder if it merits a separate column. How about moving the coordinates to the Name column, renaming this "Name and Location"? This would be neater and would reduce the amount of "white space". Having suggested this, I intend to do it to the lists I have created for Widnes and Hale, Halton.
I guess you will add the Key to Grades and the {{GeoGroupTemplate}} at the head of the list (just copy them).
While I was writing this Malleus added a comment to my talk page. I will copy this across.

Please let me know when you transfer this into main space so that I can watch its progess. Good luck! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Copied from User talk:Peter I. Vardy) Sorry for butting in. Peter's format for this kind of article is great, I agree. The lead seems a bit muddled to me though. The article is about listed buildings in the area, but we're variously confused by the village or the civil parish, and even given a population number. I think the lead needs to focus on the buildings, not on the area. Malleus Fatuorum 18:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another thought; How about a lead image? Suggest you use the most impressive one you have, to catch the eye; or if you have an alternative to one in the list (and it's impressive) use that.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Also copied from User talk:Peter I. Vardy - great minds (?)) Ditto on the apologies, but listed buildings lists are something I've been looking at recently (and I have something in my own sandbox!). The sorting of the date column isn't working at present: a 16th-century building is earlier than one from 1694, which is at the end of the 17th century, and a 1541 building is earlier still - the dates are very jumbled up. I'd be tempted to explain what a Grade II or Grade II* listed building means (either in text or in a box as at List of houses and associated buildings by John Douglas). You might also want to consider adding {{GeoGroupTemplate}} to allow easy creation of a map of the area and buildings. Otherwise, other comments I'd be making at PR or FLC are mainly nitpicks, so I'll leave those for now. Looks good, though. Bencherlite ^Talk 19:32, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I only hoped for, "well tried, you've made a good start," and I certainly didn't expect this. MF knows I am not the most technical of souls but I have had a little experiment at the bottom of the page. Is that what you mean? Please say yes or I'll be devastated :-( No seriously, I do appreciate what you're all saying, it's just figuring it all out. Good job I can rely on so many good role models and teachers. As far as the lead goes I see what MF means, I think I was trying to say there are a lot of listed buildings in a place with a tiny population. I will put my thinking cap on. Trial layout at bottom of page. User:J3Mrs/sandbox3 :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

J3Mrs, I had a look at your sandbox3 a while ago and thought it looked quite good. I meant to comment on it at the time, but got sidetracked with other things. I've had another look at it today and it looks even more impressive. I had a few suggestions with the earlier table, but they have been resolved. The only suggestion I have left is perhaps the font-size slightly reduced to 90%. I think it is more than good enough to be placed in the Rivington article. Or have you plans to create a separate article about the Rivington listed buildings with the table in it? – HLE (talk) 14:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you. It just grew!!!!!! what started as a simple table to avoid that list took over. I pinched a format from Peter I Vardy who has been good enough to help me before and thought I'd run it past him before doing something with it. What I'd really like to do is complete the photograph column. :-( I will make, I think, a simplified table for the Rivington article which should be easy now I have all the material.--J3Mrs (talk) 15:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having made my comments above, it's led me to looking at some of the lists I have created. And they have defects; even those accepted as FLs. So I've spent much of today in sorting them out; your query has led me to improve what I have done. So, there's always room for an improvement in whatever you do for Wikipedia! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I didn't mean to make work! I've done quite a bit more, MF was quite right about the Lead. I had no idea about the templates! I'd like to get a full set of images, I've looked on Geograph and the Commons. Working on it!--J3Mrs (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't apologise; it was a job that should have been done earlier but I had not got round to it. Thanks for the (unintentional) prod. Cheers.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GARs

Hi J3Mrs, I'm sorry to hear that you are non-mobile.

By all means comment: I have three reviews in progress ~~(Edward Elgar - not a geography one)~~; Sweet Track ~~and~~, Wellingborough (nearly finished) and Little Thetford. Pyrotec (talk) 19:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have not trod on my toes; and anyone can comment on a WP:GAR. As reviewer I can choose to discount your comments if I choose (I shalln't), but the nominator might be ill advised to do so. I sorry, but I haven't seen your comments yet, but thanks very much for adding them. Pyrotec (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wellingborough GA nom

Thanks for your suggestions. Why not be WP:BOLD and go ahead and do them? --Kudpung (talk) 14:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old book about Rivington

I've come across a local history book which can be downloaded free from Internet Archive's website: "Irvine, William Fergusson (1904), A short history of the township of Rivington, Edinburgh: Ballantyne Press, retrieved 2010-06-21". It may be helpful with the Rivington articles. – HLE (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff, page numbers!! I did this earlier, Holy Trinity Church, Horwich if you could cast your eye over it sometime and find my inevitable error.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks really good. I'll see if I can see if there are other bits and pieces from the two books by M.D.Smith – About Horwich and More About Horwich. I know that latter one lists the curates to 1853 and the vicars from 1853 to the end of the 20th century. – HLE (talk) 19:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good addition. By the way I've also done a bit more on Horwich, that also no doubt needs checking. Looks like with those books page numbers might also appear in Horwich. :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 19:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I used the books in your list to reference the Rivington page, it was a great help. :-) Holy Trinity Church is very much improved now.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ridgway and Ridgmont

There is a typo which I should know better. The correct surname for the family who owned Wallsuches Bleachworks is Ridgway, without an "e" in it, and not Ridgeway. They lived in a large house near the bleachworks called Ridgmont House – see [1], [2] and [3]. Near the house is Ridgmont Cemetery. I've corrected the errors it in the Wallsuches and Holy Trinity Church, Horwich articles. I'm sure you will help me in the future with spotting the typo. – HLE (talk) 20:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look out, it was probably me :-( I'm pleased at the way it's turning out though. The architect cannot possibly be the one I've wikilinked. He was born in 1815, making him 16 when he designed the church! Prodigy or what? His article says he designed on in 1824. I think it ought to be undone for now.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't heard of Francis Bedford until now. I clicked on the wiklink recently and gave it a quick glace and tidied it up bit but that was all. I'm thinking there may be two people with the same name, because the one born in 1815 cannot have designed the churches in the 1820s and 1830s. I'll try and figure it out tomorrow and let you know. – HLE (talk) 21:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look him up on the ODNB at the 24hour online library.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a quick look and I think the wiki article is wrong and should only refer to the photographer. I'll get rid of the link.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've found out about Francis Bedford, or should I say I've found out about three of them:

Francis Octavius Bedford (1784–1858) was an architect – see Francis Octavius Bedford. The information clearly states he designed churches in the 1820s, but unfortunately doesn't mention Holy Trinity Church, Horwich.
Francis Bedford (1816–1894) was a photographer and son of Francis Octavius Bedford – see Francis Bedford. I think the problem is some people have misread the information in the second paragraph and take it to mean the son was the architect of some distinction and designer some six churches when it actually meant to mean the father.
Francis Donkin Bedford (1864–1954) was an artist and book illustrator and grandson of Francis Octavius Bedford (architect) and nephew of Francis Bedford (photographer). see Francis Donkin Bedford.

I've created a stub for Francis Octavius Bedford and edited/corrected for Francis Bedford the photographer. Francis Donkin Bedford's article seems to be ok. – HLE (talk) 12:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You really are Sherlock Holmes. I'm impressed. I just knew it was wrong.--J3Mrs (talk) 18:18, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wellingborough

The Wellingborough article that you have contributed to is now very near closure of its GA review. If there are any last minute improvements you can make to address the reviewer's comments at Talk:Wellingborough/GA1, please feel free to be bold and make your contribs. Thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 04:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK churches

Nice work. There seem to be a few of us competing at the moment to make sure that every rotation of hooks at DYK has an English or Welsh church in it, preferably with a pretty picture as the lead! Bencherlite ^Talk 22:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needed a bit of help though! I'Ve changed it. I do find that site useful for coordinates. Will now change

Holy Trinity in Horwich :( Thanks for the kind words--J3Mrs (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find the church on streetmap, there's a handy facility to move the arrow to exactly where you want and then click "Click here to convert coordinates" at the bottom of the page: you get all the coords version you need (OS map, lat and long, etc). Bencherlite ^Talk 22:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manchester United F.C.

Now on its 4th FAC.[4] Some people just don't seem to get the point. Malleus Fatuorum 23:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On this subject, J3Mrs I came to ask if, given that you've helped out with this article in the past, I could tempt you back to review it? I think we've made good progress since last time (which may have been the last time you saw it?). I'm sure it won't get promoted now that Malleus has had a good old go at it, but any comments would be welcome. Thanks, Tom Tomlock01 (talk) 00:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an FA delegate, therefore my opinion is worth no more than yours Tom. Malleus Fatuorum 01:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are a lot of people around here who respect your opinion, and rightly so. I don't mind if it doesn't make it, but if that is the case, I want as many comments as I can gather to improve it. Best, Tom Tomlock01 (talk) 01:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After all the nastiness over the "discretionary" plural, I prefer not to be involved. I never figured out at whose discretion it was that it/they could be used so interchangeably. It ought to be at least consistent. I respect MF's opinion on this, it coincides with my own and it won't be MFs fault if it isn't promoted.--J3Mrs (talk) 08:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Forthcoming GA reviews

Hi. If you are interested in reviewing a few short, but clean articles of the kind that might interest you, I'm going to be making some nominations this week for GA review from a project I manage. Do take a look if you have time at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Worcestershire/Archive 1#Good Article nominations. The school one has already been peer reviewed. Thanks again for all your help.--Kudpung (talk) 01:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wellingborough is now GA

I would also like to thank you for helping out with this article which User:Kudpung and I had been working on for a while, so thanks. Likelife (talk) 18:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA reviews

Hi, to save me hunting, please let me know (preferably on my talk page) which articles of yours are GA nominations and which are already currently under review. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 21:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Holy Trinity Church, Horwich

On June 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Holy Trinity Church, Horwich, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for St Mary the Virgin, Middleton

On June 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article St Mary the Virgin, Middleton, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Larkin 25 article

Would this user stop making major edits to the Larkin 25 article without first posting on the discussion page? Do not remove sections and alter font size, etc. without discussing first. Do not keep removing the links section they are not spam.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 21:35, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In a word, No, I do not need permission to edit or remove spam.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Hepworth Wakefield.JPG

Did you forget to add a license tag for this image when uploading.?

Wikipedia takes copyrights seriously, so images need to have an appropriate license tag

You may wish to read Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/All and Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#For_image_creators which will assist you :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:27, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]