User talk:Keith D/Archive 25

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Keith D. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

→

Christmas Card

File:Wikisanta-no motto.png

Merry Christmas

At this festive time, I would like to say a very special thank you to my fellow editors, and take the time to wish you and your loved ones a very Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year. And, in case you can't wait until the big day, I've left you each three special presents, click to unwrap :) Acather96 (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Green and Yellow Present.gif

File:Yellow and Red present.gif

File:Blue and Red Present.gif

Merry, merry

Bzuk (talk) 16:43, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Standedge Tunnels article

Hi, I noticed that you contributed (a long time ago) to the /Comments page on this article. I have left a note on its talk page about the current text on the canal tunnel. I wondered if you might have some thoughts. Bob1960evens (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

May be you could have a look through the history of the article to see who added the information and see if they are still active and may be able to point you in the right direction. Keith D (talk) 21:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the right direction is about 40deg. Unless you're starting at Marsden in which case it's about 220deg. Sorry, sorry, sorry, will get coat ... DBaK (talk) 07:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Keith D. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox UK school.
Message added 08:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - January 2011

Delivered January 2011 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 08:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Advice please

Dear Keith, sorry to bother you for some admin-ish help/advice. I'm not sure what to do about what's going on at Simon Baldry but it's got the potential to become a bit of an edit war (except that to be honest I'm more likely just to give up and wander off elsewhere!). I have made attempts to discuss issues on the page with the other editor - initially in the edit summary and then on the article Talk page and on the editor's own talk page but they either don't understand what's going on and how to read or respond, or they just don't want to talk. Basically they seem to want to link pretty much everything - well, it's a whole load of stuff too but I don't want to be nitpicky and list it line by line. In addition, I have a slight concern that they might be accidentally sort-of using two accounts - it's a bit circumstantial but this and this are quite similar. I am sure it is not malicious, but that if it is the same user they've forgotten the username or password or something - and I'm not sure if in wp terms it's a big sin, a little sin or perhaps none at all. I was thinking of leaving them a polite note about this also, but since they are ignoring me anyway it seems a bit of a time-waster. I wonder what you think? I know it's a bit tangential to your editing interests but it does have a touch of Huddersfield about it. It's not really my thing that much anyway - I just stumbled on it because of my Middlesbrough-spelling obsession, and I don't really have the stomach for a fight. I just felt vaguely that I should try to help improve it a little, unwelcome though this has turned out to be! If I am being stupid and just wasting your time over nowt, please do say. Cheers, DBaK (talk) 23:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Do not think that there is much that can be done if they are not going to engage on talk pages without protecting the page which may force their hand to either engage or stop editing. I would guess that they have forgotten their password and just doing it as IP. If you want me to semi-protect for a short time then let me know. Keith D (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Keith. Many thanks for that and for having a go at the article. If the other editor is aware of editing processes and the revision history page then maybe it will help them to see that it's (meant to be) a collaborative process. Thanks also for the suggestion regarding page protection - I hadn't thought of that. I'd prefer, in a way, not to do this, but if things continue to be difficult (and, subtext, if I continue to bother to watch the page!) then it's good to know that it is a possibility. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:51, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Please add

Please add these specifications.

6.35mm is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=6.35|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.25|num=|den=}}.
7 mm (0.276 in) is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=7|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.276|num=|den=}}.
16.48mm is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=16.48|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.649|num=|den=}}.
21.97mm is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=21.97|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.865|num=|den=}}.
0.189in and 0.189" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.189|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=4.8}}.
0.315in and 0.315" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.315|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=8}}.
0.354in and 0.354" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.354|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=9}}.
0.709in and 0.709" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.709|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18}}.
0.741in and 0.741" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.741|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18.83}}.
0.748in and 0.748" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.748|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=19}}.
0.866in and 0.866" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.866|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=22}}.
69in, 69", 5ft9in and 5'9" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=5|in=8|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.75}}.

121.102.122.122 (talk) 11:17, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I had noted that you required a change to template. I am still catching up from my break, currently I am on 1 January changes so may be a bit before I get round to the change. Keith D (talk) 12:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Please update Template:RailGauge. 121.102.122.122 (talk) 10:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Please be patient. I am still checking changes from my break, I still have a weeks worth of changes to check through, and the server is serving pages very slowly so not making much progress. Keith D (talk) 13:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Please add these specifications. See Template:RailGauge.

6.35mm is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=6.35|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.25|num=|den=}}.
7 mm (0.276 in) is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=7|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.276|num=|den=}}.
16.48mm is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=16.48|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.649|num=|den=}}.
21.97mm is really {{RailGauge/metric|mm=21.97|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.865|num=|den=}}.
0.189in and 0.189" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.189|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=4.8}}.
0.315in and 0.315" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.315|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=8}}.
0.354in and 0.354" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.354|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=9}}.
0.709in and 0.709" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.709|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18}}.
0.741in and 0.741" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.741|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18.83}}.
0.748in and 0.748" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.748|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=19}}.
0.866in and 0.866" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=|in=0.866|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=22}}.
69in, 69", 5ft9in and 5'9" are really {{RailGauge/imperial|ft=5|in=8|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.75}}.

121.102.122.122 (talk) 10:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Patience as I said above. I am working through my watchlist of articles from by break. I have about 1,500 article to look at which will take about 3 days. Keith D (talk) 12:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

OK I have now caught up and have done the changes requested. Keith D (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Bettys and Taylors of Harrogate and old/new admin areas

Is there a WP policy about whether current or then-existing administrative area should be used for a placename? I can't see anything on a quick rummage, but there must be a ruling somewhere given the number of historical events in Germany and Italy before they existed, let alone the last century of border changes in Europe! PamD (talk) 09:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Probably Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) is what you are looking for with the section "Use modern names" being the appropriate section. Looks like we should use the modern day names with the previous names in historical context. Thus for birth locations use county applicable at the time of event. Keith D (talk) 12:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Goole windmill

Just a note to say I'm not ignoring your message. Been a bit busy with other stuff just lately (going for an 8th GA). Will check over next couple of days once I find my book. Mjroots (talk) 08:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Robert Carden, Governor of Antigua 1666

Keith - I have drafted an article with the above heading and it appears on my talk page. If it is ok, how do I transfer it to become a proper Wikipedia page? Cardenae (talk) 18:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, you should really have created a sub-page of your talk page for this type of work, like user talk:Cardenae/Robert Carden, Governor of Antigua 1666, but it probably does not matter for this time. I would wikify it before doing anything further, then once you are ready you can request that it be moved at Move requests. Though there may be comments by others before it is done, such as insufficient references, notability queries etc. Keith D (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I have put the article on my talk page and requested the move. Cardenae (talk) 10:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I appear to have given you a partial incorrect answer, but looks like someone else has corrected things. I must say the I have not looked at the new pages process before so will hopefully remember for future reference. Keith D (talk) 11:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Christ Church, High Harrogate

Dear Keith,

I am new to editing on Wikipedia. I am the vicar of Christ Church, Harrogate, and logged in when I realised that much of the information in the entry was very out of date, incomplete or inaccurate (including the original picture). I have successfully resolved the copyright issues over the picture (at least I think so - the new one is certainly still there!) I have also successfully updated the list of vicars.

However the history of the church has been deleted. I think the issue is copyright - but as I wrote the piece originally and own the copyright, I had assumed that I would be able to insert it into the entry. I also realise that there may be other reasons for the deletion, and I would be grateful for any advice.

Thanks.

Frnjh (talk) 16:56, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

It was for copyright reasons as it matched the information published on the church web site. Moonriddengirl is the admin who looked after the removal and has dropped you a note onto the articles talk page about what to do. Take a look at this on donating copyrighted material and see section on "Granting us permission to copy material already online" for details. Basically you need to change the church website to explicitly have a licence comparable with our licence or to send an e-mail from an address associated with the web site to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Fill in the form at WP:CONSENT and e-mail it off. Hope this is of help. Keith D (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Endcliffe Park

Hi,

You reverted a couple of changes by Bayleaf with the note "why remove detail?". Basically, the statements that were removed were not verifiable and believed to be incorrect to a high degree of confidence. I've put some notes on the discussion page for now, and will probably come back to make changes to the article but now referencing the discussion page.

Is that acceptable?

Henry Pond (talk) 01:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

That is OK. Without edit summaries on the edits I reverted, it is difficult to quickly assess and decide to keep or revert. This is especially so when you have no personal knowledge of the subject at hand. Keith D (talk) 01:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Henry Pond (talk) 11:55, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Royal Leamington Spa

Hey, you reverted a constructive edit on Royal Leamington Spa a couple of days ago, and I thought I'd just tell you that I have reinstated the change to avoid confusion. The edit in question is this one. Thanks UKWikiGuy (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It looked wrong on first glance, but reading it again in context it looks OK. Keith D (talk) 20:42, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Banburyshire

Hi there, as a resident of mid-Warwickshire for all my life I was somewhat surprised that there is an article for Banburyshire. Have you ever heard of this nickname for south Warwks/north Oxon? Cls14 (talk) 22:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I have come across the article & associated category but I have not personally heard of it. Keith D (talk) 22:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm new to this!

Thank you for pointing out my mistake in updating this page. I was just about to add references, but hadn't spotted the detail earlier on the page. I began editing because of the previous content, which was clearly inappropriate. I will be more fastidious in future.

Yours, Paul C.

81.109.11.223 (talk) 23:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

No problems. Hope you like editing and can help with producing good quality content. Keith D (talk) 23:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

I saw you have been really active lately and I clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 23:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Categories at commons

Re: this edit [1]

Firstly the place in the photograph is only on the Victoria dock branch line, not the Hull and Holderness or Hull and Hornsea. The category Kingston upon is a very top level cat, and should only really contain subcategories.Sf5xeplus (talk) 04:28, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Both lines went into Hull Paragon Station after the closure of the Victoria dock line so both the line categories are relevant to the image in order to get all images for the lines.

Secondly the lop level KuH cat is the location cat, for the moment, I am keeping the top level KuH cat on all of the Hull images pending the sorting into sub-cats for the location, probably by wards first, as it is easier to find them and just go down the images in the category. If the category is removed then the image will get missed from the location sorting process. Unfortunately the BOT has added KuH to many images in the East Riding of Yorkshire and in Lincolnshire, so I decided to start by sorting the East Riding of Yorkshire images and get those out of the Hull category as step one. There is so many problems with the images and trying to get them into the standard structure is a slow process. Keith D (talk) 13:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The categories are "Hull and Holderness Railway" the usage is quite well defined - including in the specific literature. I'm not convinced your interpretation matches any reliable source.

explain I don't think you're really getting this issue - trains did indeed do what you say - ie a train from Horsea would run through the victoria branch line to Hull Paragon - but this doesn't make that line part of the Hull and Hornsea railway - it's not categorised by timetable - Each specific "railway company" was built at a different time with different architecture, and in other ways distinct - I really don't think mixing them up is helpful.

Anyway - I could just create a hatnote link within the two affected cats to the Victoria branch subcat - then everyone is happy - Can I assume this will be ok with you? and you wont revert that area anymore?

I do not think that the categories are specifically for the lines as they were created but for the lines throughout their history with all the changes to destinations etc that happened over the years. You can put the Victoria Dock Line as a sub-cat of the 2 other cats if you wish rather than a HAT note, which is not really used apart from distinguish on Commons. By the way are you connected to the retired user User:Shortfatlad as you have similar editing patterns? Keith D (talk) 18:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As for wards - you can use all the contents of the sub-cats , and using a bot create a maintenence category for Kingston upon Hull - this would be necessary anyway I think since many files have already been categorised before in a previous attempt, and haven't been in the supercat for a long time - it's not acceptable that that category has thousands of files within in because you say you are going to do something in the future.

Please use a maintenence category - if you intend to sort by wards at a later date - I am currently sorting the files by standard categorys such as image content, and rely on the files not being put back into the top category after they have been placed in all the current relavent subcategorys (of which the list is quite extensive, and growing)

Please can you take on board the indead of a maintenence category eg "Kingston upon Hull Images requiring sorting by Ward" - it would be trivial for a bot to apply this to all the members of the subcats of Kingston upon Hull. Thanks.Sf5xeplus (talk) 15:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As I am currently removing the lincolnshire categorys as I work on the Hull images (most seem to be from Barton upon Humber) - I can let you know when the category "Kingston upon Hull" and its members contains only actual photos of Kingston upon Hull if that will be useful to you - it may happen in a few days time if no more images are uploaded. Sf5xeplus (talk) 15:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I am currently attempting to sort out the Goxhill ones which are mixed up between the East Riding and Lincolnshire places and have category entries for KuH. Keith D (talk) 18:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

more related commons info

I've created a cat "Humber estuary" and begun populating it, and requested a merge of the "river humber" category into it.

At some point a change was made moving "Kingston Upon Hull" to "Kingston upon Hull" - however I notice that a number of files have categories such as "Pubs in Kingston Upon Hull" which points nowhere rather than "Pubs in Kingston upon Hull" .. I change these as I see them - but I suspect there may be a lot - as an administrator is it possible for you to get a bot to got through all the sub-members of "Kingston upon Hull" and check for categorys using the capitalised U and change them to the correct version? (At the same time moving any categorys using capitalised U to uncapitalised u.)

eg see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Pubs_in_Kingston_Upon_Hull the category does not exist - but contains many images - similar examples exist.Sf5xeplus (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Note I've created the category - and requested a move - but I think that there are others I'm not aware of - .Sf5xeplus (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Just for information I am not an administrator on Commons so have to go through the normal process as you do to get files/categories moved and renamed. I have been though the process once moving from the upper-case non-existing version to the lower-case version of many of the Hull sub-cats, but the 2010 uploads by the BOT have re-populated them. Another BOT tried to correct this but in many cases has resulted in a duplicate lower-case version of the category which needs removing. Not sure about the Humber category as it has always been at River Humber, England and is often refereed to as a river even on the OS maps so did not think that it is worth bothering about that, just creating work. Keith D (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

final question

I noticed some period images from long ago - these aren't currently labelled as such - but I don't know how to do it - maybe by decade eg Kingston upon Hull in the 1930s etc - what is the standard for other things here? Are the any obvious missing category types excluding categorisation by ward you would like added? If you tell me now it is easier for me to do. Sf5xeplus (talk) 16:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking of going lower than wards into areas, similar to what is done for Leeds, but cannot locate any definitive maps that would show which streets are in which area. Some are obvious but others not so obvious, so as a first off stab I would go for just wards which have defined boundaries. Category for black and white images is Category:Black and white photographs of the United Kingdom which has not been broken down any further so I would use that for any of those type images that you come across. I have not added the date type cats to images that other have. There is in "year in place" categories such as Category:2005 in Kingston upon Hull and the "month year in England" categories such as Category:September 2005 in England which could be added for the date the image was taken if this is known. Someone has created Category:2000s in the East Riding of Yorkshire but it appears to be the only county to have such a category. There is also a Leeds set under Category:Centuries in Leeds that you could follow if you wish. Keith D (talk) 17:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As an aside Category:A63 (road) should really be at Category:A63 road to match others and Category:Hedon Road (A63) is incorrect as Hedon Road is the A1033, not sure if the A63 stops at the Great Union Street junction or at the Mount Pleasant junction. May be best to name it Category:Hedon Road, Kingston upon Hull or just Category:A1033 road. Keith D (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

parishes

Thanks Keith. It's generally recognised that using a tempalte for categorization purposes is a bad move though. I'll see how best to fix this up, maybe I simply have to revert myself for now. All the best. Rich Farmbrough, 00:03, 28th day of January in the year 2011 (UTC).
A good example here is Moreton cum Alcumlow, which here is categorised correctly (I presume) as Category:Civil parishes in Cheshire, by an explicit categorisation , and incorrectly as Category:Civil parishes in Cheshire East. Still looking... Rich Farmbrough, 00:07, 28th day of January in the year 2011 (UTC).

I agree, I'll add the East Riding cats now, and then the Isle of Wight ones, followed by the rest. Rich Farmbrough, 00:19, 28th day of January in the year 2011 (UTC).

Should it really be on the Isle of Wight? We'll need a Cfd for that, but "in" grates badly to me. Rich Farmbrough, 00:29, 28th day of January in the year 2011 (UTC).

OK al done apart from the speedy move request. Rich Farmbrough, 01:00, 28th day of January in the year 2011 (UTC).

Thanks Keith for your good work on Wikipedia

Thank u so much for yours corrections on Scarborough Sting. Best regards, --Geneviève (talk) 14:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for DABing Hull in CowParade

Rather lazy of me to not have checked. Tsk Icarusgeek (talk) 09:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Towns on election pages

I've made a point when adding towns to articles of attempting to add by order of "importance", i.e. biggest first. See for instance York Outer (UK Parliament constituency). Here we have a large number of small towns/large villages that few people outside North Yorkshire will know. They are in order of importance because I feel that Clifton Without should not be at the front. Crooked cottage (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I just thought that it was more logical to have in alphabetical order. Keith D (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Featherstone RUFC

Hi, I notice that you have made contributions to the Featherstone article. The current rugby league club, Featherstone Rovers, wasn't founded until 1902, and appears to have no links to the earlier rugby union club. However, I have contributed to an article about James "Jimmy" Metcalfe, and I have found details of him playing for Yorkshire in 1896/7 while playing at Featherstone (rugby union), would you have any information about the rugby union club of the 1800s in Featherstone. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 13:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, cannot help you on this one. Keith D (talk) 17:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Sagarika's Article

The article has references to Sagarika's tweet Racist Tweet where she has mentioned that all Indian men are Ugly. It was acknowledged by TeamCNN CNN support acknowledges Racist Tweet, which is official CNN support. I am not sure what else you are looking for. Please let me know what else I can do to update the page.Please let me know on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corruptcongress (talk • contribs) 01:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I am agrre with user Corruptcongress it is real incident no need to remove the section. Can you please tell me what is the reason behind removing that particular section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mihir be ce (talk • contribs) 10:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Please note that twitter is a reliable source as in the past CNN had fired one of their journalist Octavia Nasr for posting controversial tweet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corruptcongress (talk • contribs) 02:42, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Twitter is not a reliable source for wiki purposes as it is a primary self published source see WP:SPS. As this is a biography of a living person you will need much more that just twitter comments for inclusion. Keith D (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2011

Delivered February 2011 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 11:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Non-breaking spaces

I have now modified coor_g.php to accept both types of non-breaking space - see Drewton Tunnel. We know that Wikipedia is edited by computer (or rather web) nerds but there is no need to make things worse by insisting that people code   when needed. So I have raised this request at the village pump. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for progressing this. It appears that they have not enabled the replace functionality, the best I could find was {{str repc}} which does the first occurrence of a character. A function to call this recursively was my initial thought but the problem is I could not find a way of passing a space in as the character to be replaced. Keith D (talk) 22:20, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

There is more than one way to skin a cat. I have implemented the VP suggestion - try Drewton Tunnel now. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

That looks like it has done the trick, and probably saves on processing over a replace function. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 00:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Keith D is a tit

honestly don't change edits if you don't live in newark ive lived there all my life you my friend have not so you have no right to change my edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alski31 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Anybody can change your edits you do not own them. If they do not abide by our rules then they will be removed or edited. Keith D (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)