User talk:J3Mrs/Archive 7

Lists of People and References

Hello, I was wondering if you'd seen the discussion on the List of People from Bradford page about References? It seems to me we have a list of external references as long as the list itself, which seems daft if the information is backed up by existing Wikipedia articles. The Manual of Style seems to suggest we don't need them except where there is no wikipedia article. What do you think? Nick Watts (talk) 11:19, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I think all articles should be referenced, some of the linked articles aren't.--J3Mrs (talk) 11:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the main articles should be referenced :-) Nick Watts (talk) 11:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

You're doing a grand job, I can only be bothered with the real notables, the celebs leave me cold.--J3Mrs (talk) 11:44, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! It's beginning to look a bit more consistent, and I've made sure each one has a description of the link to Bradford, albeit some are somewhat tenuous... Maintaining an article like this seems to be a life's work, God knows how hard it is to maintain one with real information in it! Nick Watts (talk) 12:01, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Scarborough Castle

Good morning, If you have time, please will you have a look at Scarborough Castle. Some parts of it read like an article from the Sun!! I thought you might be able to work your WP:CE magic on it. There is an archived peer review page and I've done a bit of editing but my brain is beginning to accept the swashbuckling language. (A temporary malfunction, I hope.)--Harkey (talk) 10:22, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I've just looked, it is a bit convoluted. I'll look at some castle examples and see what they're like before I jump in with both feet!.--J3Mrs (talk) 10:39, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you.--Harkey (talk) 10:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Did you find, or do you know of, any WP:GAs about castles, please? I can only find Nunney Castle. I'd like something to try and model the Scarborough Castle article on.--Harkey (talk) 20:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd looked at Lancaster Castle but it's a B class. I've done a bit on Sandal Castle in the past but I'm no expert.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:55, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Keith has just pointed out Aberdour Castle, and at FA Bodiam Castle, as well. --Harkey (talk) 21:08, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Fortifications task force has a number of Featured and Good Articles on castles so you can get an idea of what's expected. There's quite a range of different places; I'd recommend some of the more recent articles such as those listed on Hchc2009's user page or perhaps Peveril Castle. Or if you'd like something a little closer to home Hchc2009 did a good job on York. And if you think any of them are not up to scratch (either impenetrable or written like a Sun article!) please do say as I for one have worked on quite a few of those articles and am worried about falling into bad habits. For what it's worth, Lancaster's a B-class but I'm pretty confident it's up to Wikipedia's GA standards, it's just not quite up to mine. I'm not sure how much I have on Scarborough, but I'll try to flick through my books to see what there is. Unfortunately I don't have a book specifically on Scarborough so it may on be bits and pieces. Nev1 (talk) 21:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

It's interesting to note that the article was ported from this version of the Citizendium article where has been "approved". Nev1 (talk) 22:03, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help.--Harkey (talk) 20:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

It still needs some work, especially the archaeology as it was often unclear what "it" or "this" was referring to. I needed to get away from it for a bit so I did some garden pruning instead.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Next time you feel you need a break perhaps you might come and clear out my back garden? Malleus Fatuorum 22:16, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm lethal with loppers.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I have a feeling I've asked you this before, but I can't remember what you said

Should it be, for instance "Parker mine" or "Parker Mine"? Malleus Fatuorum 23:20, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

We decided mine, I've changed it. This is not as easy as I thought. It's not like the pits I'm more familiar with.--J3Mrs (talk) 23:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I never thought it would be easy; I had to spend some time this evening learning about scarps, which was just a word to me. And I still don't understand much of the rest of the geological language. Malleus Fatuorum 23:29, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

One last question, then I'll leave you alone for now. Are you thinking of DYK for Bradford Colliery? You probably deserve one of those "four" awards. Malleus Fatuorum 23:43, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't do it for rewards, I do it because I'm interested in learning about new stuff. I could have submitted loads of DYKs but after a few, I couldn't be bothered.--J3Mrs (talk) 08:18, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

By the way you have email--J3Mrs (talk) 15:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. Looks very useful. Malleus Fatuorum 15:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Link #9 is broken in Bradford Colliery, and doesn't look like it would be the right one even if it worked; it goes to a genealogy page. Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Is there any guidance for the sections an article on a colliery ought to contain? I guess we need one, for instance, on any major incidents? Malleus Fatuorum 22:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Tweaked ref, it looks like a genealogy link but it goes to a mines list (hopefully). I've started more colliery articles I think than anybody, and I have haven't actually looked for guidelines. Where I know of a disaster, (and I know where to find reports) I usually have a section (Bedford Colliery) but some disasters have articles (of varying quality)--J3Mrs (talk) 22:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a mooch around the other colliery articles you've started to help me find my feet in this strange new world. BTW, the Bedford article says that "the colliery was sunk by John Speakman starting about 1884", but surely that can't be right? You don't sink a colliery? Malleus Fatuorum 23:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

You are, of course correct, but I think I'm the only one who reads them and I know what I mean :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 23:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Well you're not the only one who reads them now, so watch out! ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 23:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Just a comment about "sinking" (don't we all sink (frequently)?). I don't know anything about the technical (or colloquial) terms about coal mining. But my grandfather was a mining engineer, and used to drive the winding machines that carried the cages up and down the shafts. Apparently when he did this as they were digging new shafts, it was supposed to be a considerable skill. My Dad (now deceased) described it as "winding over sinkings". Does that help? Confuse? Good luck and cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:39, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Bit of both! I might have a couple Cheshire collieries in mind when I get through Lancashire, if I ever do. I could tell if a pit was winding when I was five! Oddly enough my grandfather was described as a "shaftsman" on one document we have.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

(outdent) Unbelievably (to many like me) there were coal mines in the Wirral near Neston. I have access to a paper in Cheshire History about them if ever you get round to this (and want input). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Bradford Colliery

It's beginning to take shape now? I think there's a story yet to be told about the pit's closure; I've seen passing references to "geological problems", and suggestions that mining was beginning to cause subsidence in the area, and I'm wondering if there's more to that than just the fault reactivation mentioned in the article. But I haven't yet come across anything more substantial. I do have a couple of questions though:

• The material you added today says that the City of Manchester Stadium was built next to the Bradford Colliery site, but Schofield quite clearly says it was built on it. Do we have any idea who's likely to be right?
  • You are right. Will change it.
• I'm a bit bothered by the fourth paragraph of the History section:

By now the colliery site was becoming crowded and had a brickworks that used fireclay and shale spoil from the pit. The colliery was surrounded by housing and factories in what was one of the most industrial parts of Manchester.[10] In 1919, the colliery was managed by T. H. Dixon. M. Lomas was undermanager of the Parker mine, where 498 men were employed underground and 122 on the surface. J. Garner was undermanager of the Deep mine, which had 675 underground workers and 113 on the surface.

First off, when is "by now"?

• Doing

Secondly, it seems very arbitrary to give names of undermanagers and numbers employed just for 1919. Is there anything significant about 1919?

• This was once linked to figures in earlier paragraph but whatever.

Malleus Fatuorum 15:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

• Some replies and here's a subsidence link. [1] it's on page 14--J3Mrs (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  • That's exactly what I was looking for! Malleus Fatuorum 18:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
• Did it really take seven years to dig the tunnel to Stuart Street Power Station? Or is that the time is was in use? Malleus Fatuorum 20:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

It's what the book says, but a few pages on it has a pic of it in use in 1948 so I will reword it. I need to find out when it was taken over by the cotton operator Fine Spinners and Doublers (I think it was in the early 1900s) This is a pretty unusual owner. We need to mention nationalisation.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

It's perhaps surprising how often sources disagree amongst themselves, and how often we have to make a choice between them. In this case though I simply can't believe that it took seven years to dig a tunnel. We do need to sort out the various owners, including the NCB, you're right; that part of the story looks like one of those cheeses with holes in it right now. I've added an image from the NCB's Coal Magazine, and made an effort to write a convincing free-use rationale, but if you can improve it then please do. (As the NCB was state owned, and US law considers the work of state-owned organisations to be in the public domain hopefully we won't get too much grief.) Obviously we're still missing some kind of "incidents" section, although from my reading I understand that Bradford was a relatively safe colliery, and when we've done all that pump up the lead. And then on to GAN?

I have to say that I'm quite enjoying helping you with this. Maybe together we can lay out a template for other UK colliery articles. Malleus Fatuorum 22:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

And to be honest you're geeing me up a bit. I'm reading something about longwall mining, goafs and stowing spoil underground instead of having a spoil heap. I wish my dad were here to help me out with the technical bits. I've just realised it had a locomotive & sidings too. You lost me when you said template but it sounds like a good idea, would it be something I could add into the things I've already started? PS I like the pic.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Nothing so clever I'm afraid. I just meant a pattern that might make it easier to organise articles on other collieries. Like I did with my witches, who I think must be starting to miss me now. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:27, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

PS. It's tough ploughing a lonely furrow, I know. It's a shame the GM project isn't more active, but there are still a few of us around, in fact quite a few now I come to think of it: you, me, PoD, Nev1, Richerman, Mr Stephen, and Oldelpaso spring immediately to mind. Malleus Fatuorum 22:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

It's Peter I. Vardy who ploughs the lonely furrow, but I consider him to be an honorary Mancunian. I hope he doesn't consider that an insult.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

You're right, but there were once collieries in Cheshire (as there were witches), so you might convert him to your cause. I was born in Cheshire, and I really feel I ought to do more to help; perhaps one day I'll do something significant with Crewe for instance, but I doubt it. Writing about places has become a "Notable persons" nightmare as far as I'm concerned. Malleus Fatuorum 23:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

And consider this. Until you started on these colliery articles there was nothing worth spit. I'm sure your Dad would be proud of what you've done. Malleus Fatuorum 01:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

It's actually quite good to be considered an "honorary Mancunian" (thanks). I haven't formally become a participant in the Manchester Project because it is more fortunate than most in its active membership. In addition to Cheshire, I do try to support Merseyside and Lancs & Cumbria (who both need it). At the moment I'm doing most of my work on the Lancaster practice of architects Sharpe, Paley and Austin, and a bit on notable buildings in Liverpool. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm pleased you consider it a good thing. Whenever I venture into Lancashire often I end up wishing I hadn't, but because of an obstinate streak I am not deterred. The Fletchers who owned pits in Atherton paid for St Michael and All Angels at Howe Bridge I think, architects Paley & Austin, that must be worth an article. The Fletchers warrant an article too but I don't know what i'd call it.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:13, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I've started a new Incidents section, but I think we ought to preface it with a sentence or two about the colliery's generally good safety record, and relatively good conditions for a deep mine, if you've got any material. Malleus Fatuorum 00:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll look. By the way the pit had more than two shafts, it had at least three, maybe four. A quick look at the Guardian searching for "Bradford Colliery" brings up zillions of articles. There are no references to more than five deaths at one time in the Disasters database but I found one for three deaths in the Guardian. There was a boilerhouse explosion in 1953 which stranded men below ground and halted production. Here are some examples, I think you have access.

[2] Cage falls half a mile [3] Cracks in culvert under gasworks [4] Few weeks before pit resumes work [5] Manchester pit accident 3 men killed

Sorry I vanished, real life took over. The colliery had it's share of accidents and deaths according to the database but none that involved more than three deaths. I think there might have been a campaign to keep it open.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I suppose every colliery did, so we probably need to focus on any major incidents, or those that received widespread coverage. I'm also still looking for an observation on the colliery's general standard of safety, which I'm sure I've seen someone somewhere say was pretty good. What's clear from contemporary newspaper reports is that Manchester Council was becoming very concerned about the damage mining was causing in and around the city centre, and was considering a compensation claim of £2.5 million against the NCB. Malleus Fatuorum 18:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• What do you think remains to be done before GAN? I can see that we need to plug the gap in incidents between 1622 and 1924, but I haven't found any general statement on the colliery's safety record; perhaps I imagined it. I'm not sure what a reviewer might expect of a colliery article, as so far as I'm aware there aren't any colliery GAs or FAs, but it might be interesting to find out. Regardless, this is surely the best colliery article I've ever come across on Wikipedia. Malleus Fatuorum 22:53, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I've got rather bogged down reading the Guardian, which doesn't always make sense. I don't think that general statement about safety exists. I'll look for a couple of incidents.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:58, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I used to be a fan of The Grauniad in my student days, but I've not read it for years. I remember going to an interview after I left university during which I was asked which newspaper I read. "The Guardian" said I. There was a moment's pause before one of the panel asked why I didn't read the Daily Telegraph. I was rather naive in those days. Still am in many ways, which is why I continue to waste too much of my time here on Wikipedia despite all the odds. Anyway, back to business. I struggled with this for a little while: "A sirocco-type ventilation fan made by Hick, Hargreaves, and one of the earliest electrical plants in any colliery were installed". When I first read it I thought that the ventilation fan was the electrical plant, but I'm now unsure what the electrical plant was providing power for. What does "electrical plant" mean in this context? A generator? Electrically powered machinery like the fans? Malleus Fatuorum 00:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The plant provided power for the colliery in general, the ref didn't specify. I've changed the "colliery embarked" to new owners embarked too. And now I must fly.

I think it's pretty comprehensive now, geology, history, closure. I've been surprised at how little has been written but suppose it's a minority interest. I could look in at the Mining Museum Library but not until the end of next week as I might be vanishing again after Friday.

Do you want to stick it into GAN then, and see how it gets on? Malleus Fatuorum 22:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Here goes but I can't really see a suitable category so I'll stick it in miscellaneous, you can change it if you've a better thought.--J3Mrs (talk) 07:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Someone put it somewhere so that's done, and I'm probably vanishing until after the weekend, had a much better offer than waiting for a reviewer.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

St Michael and All Angels, Howe Bridge

I've taken the challenge, and am about to embark on the article (it was on my to-do list anyway). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm embarrassed, I meant I ought to, but I know you'll do a much better job. :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 12:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

It's done; no "better" than you would do it. The History section's a bit thin, but I don't have any further sources. I guess you will be able to improve this.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:13, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Wow that's fast, I'll see what I can find. Thank you so much.--J3Mrs (talk) 13:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Lancashire Coalfield

For your information, I have asked for opinions on the categorisation of Lancashire Coalfield at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#County categories and historical articles. -- Dr Greg  talk  20:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

For your information I disagree, the coalfield isn't a colliery!--J3Mrs (talk) 21:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Oops, my apologies! I misunderstood your actions; you didn't remove Category:Coal mines in Lancashire which, I now gather, you think also should be removed? -- Dr Greg  talk  21:51, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes I suppose it should. I'll remove it it.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I've always found it very difficult to get excited about categories. So far as I can see editors add and remove them willy-nilly, without rhyme nor reason. Malleus Fatuorum 23:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)i

I've always found it very difficult to understand about categories. Some editors seem to see it as a mission. Some seem totally spurious and totally irrelevant and sometimes misleading. Still it ups the edit count without writing anything.--J3Mrs (talk) 10:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Disappointing

It's disappointing we haven't had a reviewer for Bradford Colliery yet, but I guess all we can do is be patient. I'm not sure why it is, but I'm finding it very difficult to finish off workhouse so that it too can sit ignored at GAN. There's just so much ... still got to deal with the "pauper's palaces" criticism, expand on the work and probably diet, rewrite the lead, either find citations or rewrite stuff I didn't write and God knows what else. Still, at least it's better than it was, in my opinion anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 21:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

... actually, looking at the colliery afresh again after a couple of weeks away it looks like a really nice piece of work to me. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 21:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

It is disappointing, perhaps you should have nominated it and one of your "stalkers" might have noticed. There is indeed much to write, I must do something about the redlink. Nice to see you back in the workhouse. :-) That really is a worthwhile cause. I think the problem is our heritage is being forgotten while current trivial celebrity obsessed culture is much more important to the youth of today. Mind you I might have been the same when I was young but I......... too far back to remember. I must see what I can do to tidy the other colliery articles I started when time permits.--J3Mrs (talk) 08:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Why the reference to OT Cricket Ground in Trafford then?

I imagine you are a old pensioner who has nothing else better to do than to lecture and belittle other editors about 'prose' and annoy people. I want to know why the article says: "Lancashire County Cricket Club's ground is also in Old Trafford". Surely that is 'redundant' for the Manchester article... Stevo1000 (talk) 16:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

How about you strike those personal comments, Stevo. Nev1 (talk) 23:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Righteous indignation will not improve wikipedia nor Stevo's grammar, a old pensioner indeed!--J3Mrs (talk) 09:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

PS Stevo's addition to Manchester Piccadilly doesn't make sense either.--J3Mrs (talk) 09:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

And there is your problem, obsessed with other contributors edits so you can just wind them up the wrong way. And I wonder why Wikipedia is losing contributors? Maybe having haughty, irritating users, who see themselves as editors (rather than contributors) with nothing else to do has something to do with it? Stevo1000 (talk) 12:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Go away and try to annoy someone who is bothered about your views.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

No one is immune from criticism, Stevo, regardless of however good their intentions may be. Your accusation of obsession is wide of the mark; remarking on a single other article you edited hardly amounts to that. Oddly enough it wasn't J3Mrs who resurrected this thread, unable to let the matter go. Nev1 (talk) 12:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Bradford Colliery's GA review

We've got a review at last! You dig in and I'll try to mop up behind you. Or I'll dig in and you mop up behind me, but it doesn't seem like much needs doing. Malleus Fatuorum 02:17, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Only one thing left for you to deal with I think. Is the Livesey of Clegg and Livesey actually Thomas Livesey? Malleus Fatuorum 00:37, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Scrub that, I don't think it's important. The significant thing about 1840 is that the first deep shaft was sunk that year, not who then owned the colliery. It might one day be worth expanding on the role of the Livesey family, as they seem to have been involved in the colliery for some time, but not necessary for GA I don't think. Malleus Fatuorum 15:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

• Congratulations, job done. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Many, many apologies for my absence, and thank you so much for dealing with the review while I was enjoying wine and cake in foreign climes. This is obviously as much your article as mine so congratulations to you too. Thank you again and sorry I wasn't here.--J3Mrs (talk) 10:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Tin tabernacle

I see that you have been interested in this article. I have found a few more examples in the new edition of the Cheshire Pevsner, and wonder if you would be unhappy if I were to amend the format of the list. It could look something like this. I have added a column for the location (this is not immediately obvious in the current list), included the refs in the Notes, made a couple of columns sortable, and used the location as the default order. What do you think? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

That looks much better Peter, do go ahead, I'm useless at that sort of thing. I'm glad there are more about than I thought! Not many where I am though.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll go ahead and use the newer format. There are more tin tabernacles around than you (or I) might think: have a look at this. I'll have a go at adding some of these — it should make an interesting list-article. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:18, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll see if I can dig anything up too, I think they're a fascinating bit of our history.--J3Mrs (talk) 08:43, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Whitby

I'm away until Sunday so, please, "keep the pot boiling" if the review starts! Doesn't it always happen? --Harkey (talk) 17:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes I was away last weekend when Bradford Colliery was reviewed, but fortunately I had a lot of help.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Answer to your question on my talk page. Wim van Dorst (talk) 22:03, 7 October 2011 (UTC).

Hmmm--Harkey (talk) 15:27, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm reminded of a saying of my mother's, "Those of you think you know everything are annoying those of us who do!"  ;-) I'm getting sick to the back teeth of inconsistency on Wikipedia as far as assessment is concerned. Too many chiefs and not enough indians!! --Harkey (talk) 16:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I've never encountered the Peer reviewers and if this is what they do, they ought to be told.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:34, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Removal of refences

Sorry mate, but, where have I removed them pal? (Preston North End Dan (talk) 18:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC))

I have replaced them in Tarleton and Longton, Lancashire. If you read Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements you will see there is a Manual of Style relatinf to the content and structure of settlement articles.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

MediaCityUK

I see you're in the wars again. FWIW I'm on your side. Malleus Fatuorum 21:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I knew I would be before I hit the keyboard earlier today, but the article is on the list of most viewed GM articles and it's frankly awful. We walked round the place on the day we sailed down the Ship Canal (Congratulations to you & PoD by the way) but it was pouring so no pics. The last thing on my mind was the history of the BBC/ITV. Some people have no idea how to write a sentence let alone construct an article but they are often the first to complain. My skin grows thicker by the day. Great to see the Workhouse coming along. PS in the north during the Cotton Famine there were real problems (and I think outdoor relief and various infrastructure schemes were started) but I can't think where I read it.--J3Mrs (talk) 21:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Growing a thicker skin is the only way to survive here I'm sorry to say. I'm really hoping that when we get the workhouse article together we can all branch out and cover at least some of the workhouses around GM, Lancashire and Cheshire, and your list is a good start. I think it's an important story that needs to be told. Just like the witches, who must by now thinking I've abandoned them. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

It mentioned on the radio that next year is the witch trials 400th anniversary. I started an article on the Leigh Union workhouse but you know what I'm like :-(.

I do know what you're like: an editor who underestimates what she's done and what she can do for the dissemination of free knowledge. Malleus Fatuorum 22:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Jeez! Can you even begin to imagine what the vandalism's going to be like next year? I've been through the April Fool's wife selling war, so I think I have some idea. But what still pisses me off about that is being accused of sexism and worse for simply reporting on an English custom. My hope however is that the Cotswold Olimpick Games may turn out to be a dark horse winner next year given the 2012 London Olympics. Malleus Fatuorum 00:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

You're doing a great job with this article, I hope you can keep it up. This is obviously a very important development for Manchester, perhaps in its way on a par with the ship canal, and we ought to be able to do it justice. Malleus Fatuorum 00:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You seem to be in a minority here. There are a couple of reasons why I actually feel like walking away if you look at the article's talk page. I only intended to copyedit it into readable English and broaden its scope from the TV obsessed article it was. I agree with what you say and it should be done justice but I just don't know if it's possible.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

As I said above.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Well one thing's for sure; you've blown whatever chance you had of ever becoming an administrator. But that's no bad thing. It always brings a smile to my face when some kid like Stevo1000 calls me immature, with the implication of course that he is the very eipitomy of maturity despite hardly being out of nappies. Malleus Fatuorum 23:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

What's an administrator and why would I want to be one? I sometimes wonder if I even want to edit. So I'm a bad guy and you're immature. What did I do? I don't recall calling anybody names, I've refrained from expletives and you have behaved with remarkable restraint. Fortunately there's a bit of me that sees the very funny side. It's like the playground, I can shout louder than you even if you're right, I've been here longer than you, we should tell the teacher/administrator, and all the jumping up and down. Once I would have been "ruffled", now I read it to my family who enjoy the entertainment.--J3Mrs (talk) 10:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I find that that there's a limit to the amount of abuse I'm prepared to accept from children. In the real world I'd be grabbing them round the ear and marching them off to their parents to deal with. Which I have done before, and will do again if necessary. This talk of bullies and cowards is ridiculous. Malleus Fatuorum 21:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I retired to the pub. You are of course, right.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Mediacity

What are your intentions for the page? Stevo1000 (talk) 17:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Obviously to improve it. What an odd question.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

More specifically. Add companies other than BBC and ITV is something I agree on. But what gets added after that? The project is in really in its naissance at the moment it is difficult to see what could be added to improve the page. Stevo1000 (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

And what are yours? Leave it in its poor shape?--J3Mrs (talk) 17:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Nice job with the Buildings and facilities section; that's exactly what I had in mind. I think the article is really starting to shape up now, especially with the addition/expansion of the Background section and some judicious pruning. Malleus Fatuorum 12:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I think the main elements are covered now, I suspect there is still some overlinking. The History/Background section was largely down to Pit-yacker who I think has summed it up pretty concisely.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm actually beginning to wonder if this wouldn't stand a chance at GAN now, that's how much I think it's improved. Malleus Fatuorum 13:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I wondered about that too.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The lead needs expanding which is not my forte :-(--J3Mrs (talk) 14:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

You expanded the lead a bit and I added another bit; my rule of thumb is to pick the important points from each section. So far as GAN is concerned, I think that you and Pit-yacker have done a fantastic job, and I'd go for it if I were you. Malleus Fatuorum 22:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I have this "thing" about leads, I know what's required but for some reason its a weak spot, one among many. Anyway what about your contributions? I have one more avenue to explore and have started to check through the refs as I didn't add them. I've found one that didn't say what the contributer thought so I'd better look through them all. Perhaps if you nominated it, one of your stalkers might see it. Will the tantrums be a problem?--J3Mrs (talk) 08:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it makes any difference who nominates it, but I will if you like, just as soon as you think you're done. So far as the tantrums are concerned a little green dot will surely put an end to them. Malleus Fatuorum 15:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't find what I was looking for, so whenever you like.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, done. Malleus Fatuorum 21:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Glad to see that you were back in time to deal with the GA review, rather than leave it all to me as you usually do; ;-) Malleus Fatuorum

The least I could do. Go on make me feel guilty again.:-) I'll do what I can when I'm here.--J3Mrs (talk) 23:32, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Have you noticed how quiet our friends like Stevo1000 have become since we primped this up? Let's hope they've learned a lesson. Malleus Fatuorum 23:43, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh I don't know, if I edit anything of interest that pops up on the watchlist that Stevo has edited I get accused of stalking him. C'est la vie. I doubt any lesson has been learned as I attempted to "educate" him a bit when my son took me to Urbis (which I hated). You can lead the........ you know what I mean. ;-)--J3Mrs (talk) 08:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to all who helped turn my choppy and incoherent edits into a Good Article. --J3Mrs (talk) 18:09, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Gosh, that's some good work! Congrats. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:12, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh not just me, Malleus and Pityacker and PoD chipped in with a great pic. It was a sort of rescue job. --J3Mrs (talk) 18:21, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes I despair

I've dragged across a few articles over the hour or so as a result on investigating changes that popped up on my watchlist, and it's a desperately depressing business by and large. From your Free Trade Hall (nice to see someone at last taking a real interest in that) I just buzzed over to Bridgewater Hall: just look at it! One of its most important architectural features is that it sits on a bed of springs, but the tiny section describing that is even mis-spelled.[[6] Malleus Fatuorum 19:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I just looked. I'd better keep my mouth shut as I've just looked at the history.--J3Mrs (talk) 19:32, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't spotted that. :-( Malleus Fatuorum 19:39, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

All you can do is; take a deep breath, re-write it in a sandbox, and when it is ready, replace the whole article (or the bad bits) and describe it as an "expansion". I've done it myself, and it seems to work. We've just got to keep working away at the project, and improve what we can, when we can. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Peter, I'm not generally too fussed about taking the bull by the horns, as you might have noticed during my transformation into the wicked witch of the GM project but when you know it'll create another huge drama...I might think twice. Your idea might work though.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:13, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

You'll find the sort of thing I mean at Church of St Mary the Virgin, Prestwich. GM people may have sources to further improve the article (it certainly needed improvement!). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

That is a fantastic improvement Peter, up to your usual high standards, very well done. As for bulls and horns, I succumbed and grasped them.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Whitby/GA1

Good work on Whitby. I'd like to list it, but it needs to be thoroughly checked for copyvio. I looked at another source today and found another example of copy and paste editing. It may just be confined to the Economics section, but it would be of benefit to check the rest of the article. I'm putting the GAN on hold for another week to allow people time to check for and clean up the copyvios. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

This user helped promote Whitby to good article status.

Good work - well done. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 21:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help and hard graft, particularly in the past week. For the last two weeks I've been working full time on the final draft of a Village design statement that had a deadline of Friday (yesterday). Out of (Wikipedia) habit, I found myself putting in citations for every paragraph and cutting out "flowery" language. I meant what I said about the cake; you deserve one!--Harkey (talk) 13:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Whitby is a favourite place since the early 70s. I've made a cake this morning, it won't last long! A good collaborative effort I think.--J3Mrs (talk) 13:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Southwell Workhouse

Sorry, I don't get the point, buildings owned by the NT are not used for their original purpose and are generally museums of a sort? Bevo74 (talk) 20:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

It is altering the focus of the paragraph which is about workhouses not a link for the NT. Just my opinion.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:39, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

(ec) True, but isn't it simpler to state it's a museum as not everyone will know what the National Trust does? Furthermore, that the National Trust owns the site is of course relevant to the this article, but isn't really important to the workhouse article. Nev1 (talk) 20:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Wakefield

How would you feel about going for GA class on Wakefield? You put in a lot of work and it deserves some recognition. (That'll keep you out of mischief!)--Harkey (talk) 16:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Well it ain't my favourite place and I haven't read through it recently but I'll look through it. I do enjoy a good collaboration but I'm none too patient these days, too much appalling English and holier than thou editors.--J3Mrs (talk) 17:53, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I haven't been there above half a dozen times in my life, despite living and working in Leeds for a long time, so I have no great attachment. I promise to hide my halo and watch my language. (Although I have been tempted sometimes on Wikipedia to use the street language I heard in inner city Leeds.) ;-)--Harkey (talk) 18:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I can call a spade a shovel with the best of them. :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Some bits need refs and some need expanding, I'm a bit busy for the next week but I think we can do it. It might need a library visit.--J3Mrs (talk) 13:12, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed a few dead links this morning. I'll check through then see if I can find replacements.--Harkey (talk) 16:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit stalking

Will you please refrain from edit stalking. I don't need you following my every move like a bitter, obsessed individual. I find it quite pathetic to be honest. I know your silly little game, it is to irritate other editors because you have nothing else better to do with your sad, sad life. So get a life and stop it. Stevo1000 (talk) 02:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I see you are your usual polite self.--J3Mrs (talk) 09:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)