User talk:Martin of Sheffield/Archive 3

Edit

I was hoping you could help me out, see I keeping adding accruate and correct information to this page but, an annomyous person keeps reversing it despite it be correct and my fruitless efforts to talk to him. It seems I am not the only person who has issues with him. I was wondering what I could do about this matter. LoneWolf1992 (talk 8:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi LoneWolf. I can't do anything about the edits, I'm not an administrator and know nothing about Is This a Zombie. Looking at the edit history though, this has degenerated into an WP:EDITWAR which is banned. You are also possibly in breach of WP:3RR which states that you cannot revert a page more than three times in any one day. Such actions, however justified, can lead to a ban, so please back off. The fact that your adversary is an IP editor and not a registered user may help your cause, in any case you need to take this to an administrator or to the arbitration committee if you want to persue a resolution. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but I don't know any administrators and I will for now. How can I do take this to an arbitratio comitee?

I've posted a report about this on the administrators' notice board for you. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I got a messagae about that but, I don't want to be suspended. I honestly didn't realize I couldn't do that until you told me. LoneWolf1992 (talk 4:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Go to the administrator's notice board following the link in the message. Under "comments" add a short note explaining that you are relatively inexperienced and were not aware of 3RR. Draw attention to the fact that you stopped as soon as you were warned. Keep checking back, editing the page should have added it to your watchlist. I'll be keeping half an eye on it myself, but as I stated earlier I have neither the authority nor the experience to sort out recalcitrant IP users. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did that and hopefully they'll be understanding. Thanks again for the help. LoneWolf1992 (talk 19:00, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

St Giles, Wormshill

Just passing by to say thank you for your efforts on St Giles, Wormshill‎. As a former resident of the village and the original author of the article (and Wormshill), it's great to see other editors pass by who are able to improve the content. Much appreciated Dick G (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's nice to know that one's efforts are appreciated, and thankyou for the copy edit - I don't know how I missed that one!. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weston Road- Saturday- No 65

This is family/street/and whoever event- but feel free to drop by. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7828363/invite%20wrpl.png. It starts at three for grandchildren then continues-- probably till late Sunday if last year were anything to go by .. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 09:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then I was up at Burnley for Wikipedia:GLAM/Queen Street Mill Museum and have several articles under way I thought you might like to join in the savaging/copyediting. Kissing the shuttle still has a long way to go and a lot of interesting redlinks!-- Clem Rutter (talk) 09:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Drakelow Hillfort

Last year I wrote a stub on Drakelow Hillfort. The major source was:

English Heritage staff (2007), Monument number 116769, English Heritage's PastScape website, retrieved July 2012 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); External link in |publisher= (help)

Two questions:

Other than they are published by English heritage, do you know if there is any the relationship between English Heritage's PastScape website and the National Heritage List for England?
Is there a template for PastScape entries?

-- PBS (talk) 09:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer to both questions is "I don't know". Having said that, a comparison of http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1010721 and http://www.pastscape.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=116769# indicates a rather different structure. Have you read the PastScape home page and About PastScape? I think that the listings are regarded as being too technical for many readers. Drakelow Hillfort is actually quite a straightforward entry, but have a look at http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1086423 for an example of dense text littered with technical terms and abbreviations. PastScape however seems to be more interpretive, great for the general public but not always as much use for the serious researcher. In addition, I think that PastScape draws from all EH records, whereas NHLE is a formal list of graded buildings and scheduled monuments. What is ridiculous is that PastScape calls it monument 116769 whilst the NHLE list entry is 1010721. As a guide I've added the scheduling information from NHLE, feel free to hack it about in any way you need. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:44, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Searching on Pastscape in the template domain returned {{Cite PastScape}} which had a see also entry for {{IoE}} (Images of England, English Heritage). It seems that they both could do with a similar makeover as was given to {{NHLE}} so that they will work as short citations. (There are also {{IoEentry}} and {{IoEgrade}} which are related to {{IoE}}). If each of these templates is given a category then then using the tool catscan can be used to see which ones could do with an entry from the others' databases. -- PBS (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Smack - sound of hand hitting forehead! I've only just cross checked and realised that it was you that did the NHLE change, and that you're an admin! I was in "help newbie" mode, sorry if I seemed patronising. Egg sucking instruction was not intended.

Your work on NHLE was excellent, I would question though if IoE or PastScape are ideal as sources if NHLE is available. Miller & Jones taken with NHLE(1010721) cover virtually all the detail and have the feel of decent secondary sources rather than a tertiary source, no better that Wikipedia itself. All IMHO of course. Still, I'll keep an eye on anything you want and try to give constructive feedback. Regards (and apologies) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not too many but duplicated

Just for your information, my bot removed duplicated categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:18, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with citations in the body paragraph

Hi Martin of Sheffield. I noticed all your contributions and really appreciate your work. I was hoping you could help me with an article I'm trying to write out currently in my sandbox. I wanted to add this as a reference, but couldn't get the coding in the citation right. Could you help me out? I'm trying to add this website as a reference: http://www.worldcoal.org/resources/coal-statistics/

Could you help me out?Kayeane 03:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC) Kayeane 03:09, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Kayeane. Unusually I'm moving this discussion over to your talk page, I'll try and add some helpful comments at lunch time. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to Flageolet Wiki

DISREGARD! Mea culpa! On further research, this turns out to be "historical fiction" with Edward White being the author and not the translator! Apologies: the style of writing misled me. So obviously, wherever he got "flageolet" as the name of the flute the character is using .. it may have been in error. Interesting, eh? And part of the dilemma that comes with reading historical fiction: you never know what's historical :-)

--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.88.234.143 (talk) 18:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for disturbing you, but I need help. I do not know how to make Wiki page changes, and in my ignorance hesitate to try. However, the page on the Flagiolette (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flageolet) says it was invented in the 16th Century: " Its invention is ascribed to the 16th century Sieur Juvigny in 1581". That may be true. However I'm currently reading a Most Ancient book: White, Edward Lucas (2004-12-01). Andivius Hedulio Adventures of a Roman Nobleman in the Days of the Empire (p. 148). Public Domain Books. Kindle Edition.

In this book (during the reign of Commodus, 2d Century AD), the author mentions his slave bringing along a "flageolet". That is the word in the English translation. Sorry, but I don't have access to the Latin version.

If this book, and the author's writings, are correct, and if the translation of the original Latin word for whatever musical instrument or flute was correct .. this puts the invention of the flageolet about 1300 years earlier than the Sieur Juvigny reference.

If you'd be interested in making this change, I'd be most appreciative. I'll do more reference (although my Latin is very VERY rusty) and see if I can't find the original Latin version of this book, and the Latin name of the musical instrument referred to.

Regards, David Kirschbaum squiretoad@hotmail.com 24.88.234.143 (talk) 18:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]