User talk:Owain/archive6

Newbridge station

I moved this back to Newbridge (Caerphilly) railway station. It doesn't matter in this case whether they're separate towns. Newbridge is located in Caerphilly (county borough). If, for example something is Blah, Durham, this does not necessarily mean that they are located in the city of Durham, more the County of Durham. Simply south (talk) 13:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Newbridge (Caerphilly county borough) would be better. Caerphilly is still a separate town, and the unqualified use of the word means that, as it has for over 1000 years, not some transient local government area that has existed a mere 11 years. Owain (talk) 14:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hundreds, and edit summaries

I notice you have been changing a number of articles about historic units of local government to the present tense. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] This is unusual in that a variety of other editors have constructed similar articles on hundreds, often with a good selection of references, and used the past tense. I suggest you conform to this convention. Additionally, I would encourage you to edit summaries when editing. MRSC • Talk 22:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The past tense is not appropriate when referring to geographical areas. The distinction between an area and any extant local government for that area is quite clear. The metropolitan counties have no role in local government yet are universally referred to in Wikipedia in the present tense. Hundreds may have no role in local government either but clearly as a description for a defined geographical area, they still exist. Owain (talk) 12:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of reverting this please be advised there is a discussion on this here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Articles_on_hundreds. There is no consensus for writing about historic units of local government in the present tense. MRSC • Talk 04:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I noticed that you seem to be of a similar opinion to me when it comes to the historic/traditional counties of England/Great Britain, and just wanted to make my presence known and say hello. I've been an editor of Wikipedia for a while now, but haven't given many major contributions, due to trying to finish off a PhD. If there's anything I can help with though, or any discussions to get involved with, particularly regarding the counties, I'd love to get involved. Cheers. --El Pollo Diablo (Talk) 11:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! There does seem to be this strange fact blindness on Wikipedia where despite verifiable evidence to the contrary, certain editors have a policy whereby the historic counties are deemed not to exist! Lancsalot entered into a debate at Talk:Historic counties of England whereby verifiable facts were presented, only to be continually rebutted with "we have a policy...". It seems a strange world where the truth is agreed at by consensus, especially where there isn't a consensus! Where certain editors do see fit to acknowledge the counties existence they have a habit of slipping in past tense references, despite the fact that they cannot actually come up with a point in time at which they became "in the past", so watch out for that! This encyclopædia is supposed to be based on verifiable facts, so don't let them push you around. Good luck! Owain (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Newport station

Before we get into an edit war, please check Talk:Newport railway station (South Wales)#Requested move to see why the current name. Simply south (talk) 13:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale for disambiguation in that way is deeply flawed. I can read pages of drivel debate if I like, but you are all voting on something you don't understand. You can't arrive at the truth through uninformed consensus. In any case I have solved the problem by using the official name. Problem solved! Owain (talk) 13:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Newport-Mon-Coat-of-Arms.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Newport-Mon-Coat-of-Arms.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 22:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Newport-Mon-Coat-of-Arms.png

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Newport-Mon-Coat-of-Arms.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Geniac (talk) 16:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Scotland county

I note you have worked on this infbox template. The template appears to me to be almost designed to produce nonsensical results. See also Talk:County of Nairn. Laurel Bush (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Hmm, I looked at the version before you removed it and it seems perfectly sensible to me. What is nonsensical about it? Owain (talk) 19:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newport County crest.png

Thank you for uploading Image:Newport County crest.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newport YMCA crest.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Newport YMCA crest.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wales dialling codes

How dare you make such a drastic edit. I haven't even finished working on the article yet so it would be full of errors. If you have a problem, you discuss it on the talk page or nominate it for deletion so other editiors can comment on it. Welshleprechaun (talk) 14:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is a duplicate of the List of United Kingdom dialling codes and would be merged back into the main page anyway. I am saving you the hassle of having to undo thousands of edits. Owain (talk) 14:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:ABC_Great_Britain_counties.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:ABC_Great_Britain_counties.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 10:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cauda Pavonis logo.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cauda Pavonis logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 16:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cauda Pavonis band.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cauda Pavonis band.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 16:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Torfaen

The Etymology section of this article states that "The name Torfaen is corrupted Welsh for rock breaker and refers to the river that flows through the county borough from its source in Blaenavon. The river in question is now known as the Afon Llwyd".

Why it is saying "The river in question is now known as Afon Llwyd"? Why the use of "now"? Does this mean that the river was previously known by some other names? But the article Afon Llwyd does not suggest anything like that. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original change happened here. The text used to say The name 'Torfaen' is corrupted Welsh for 'rock breaker' and was the original name of the Afon Llwyd, the principle river that flows through the area., stating that the river was originally called "Torfaen". I agree that the current wording doesn't explain this very well. I shall amend it. Owain (talk) 11:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:The Vision of St Gwynllyw.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The Vision of St Gwynllyw.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:Geography of Brecknockshire

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Geography of Brecknockshire, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Geography of Brecknockshire has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Geography of Brecknockshire, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:00, 19 June 2008

(UTC)

Annapolis

fear maigh fein!good man yerself! while i might otherwise condemn you for a sassenach oppressor, that little twerp who keeps deleting the u.k. here pisses me off. you do know it's a nine year old?Toyokuni3 (talk) 23:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've left him a warning on his talk page about it. Sassenach? I'm from Monmouthshire. No-one likes us, but we don't care... ;) Owain (talk) 06:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

South or south Wales?

Hi Owain,

Have you noticed that in the past few weeks Wesinger has been busy deleting 'South' from every reference to 'South Wales' he can find in lead sections on Welsh pages? He uses as a reason for changing literally hundreds of pages - '(changed lead as per Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements)' I've looked at the relevent page and can't find any such justification, and I can't find any discussion about it anywhere. Isn't there supposed to be a consensus on such things before such drastic action is taken? I'd appreciate your comments. ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ ^talk 08:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is supposed to be a consensus, but as you know unilateral action is taken all the time, especially in regard to UK geography. Geography is supposed to be exactly that - a description of where a place is, but editors here frequently mix it up with geopolitics and administrative boundaries. I'm all for use of geographical counties, not political or administrative constructs as few people have any idea where they are and they change frequently. In the absence of this a comparison can be drawn with the categorisation system: The page should be categorised at the lowest-possible level with higher levels having greater scope. In this instance the use of "South Wales" makes more sense as it is a lower level. The South Wales page then explains it is part of Wales with the Wales page indicating it is part of Great Britain, and so on. If we don't follow the lowest-level rule then we may as well put Earth or something obtuse like that. Owain (talk) 11:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, most of which I agree with. The fact that he has had to change hundreds of pages (I gave up counting when I reached two hundred!) surely indicates that there are hundreds of other editors who would disagree with him. Wikipedia will never succeed as a bona fide encyclopedia if one individual can ride roughshod over the will of others. What can be done about it? ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ ^talk 11:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess one can use a bot to follow South Wales -> Wales changes and revert them, either those made by this particular user, or generally. AutoWikiBrowser may be a solution too but I've never used it as it is a horrible Windows.NET creation. Owain (talk) 12:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, I don't use Windoze at all, and I wouldn't know how to create a bot. ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ ^talk 12:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't use Windows either, hence my distaste for .NET! Take a look at Wikipedia:Bot requests and the associated links at the top. Good luck! Owain (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK 2.0 Voting is open :-)

A warm hello to all those signed up as guarantor members of the soon-to-be-rebooted UK chapter! Voting is now open over at meta - there's tons of information online over there, and the mailing list has been very active too. Discussion, comment (and even the inevitable technical gremlins!) are most welcome at the meta pages, otherwise please do send in your vote/s, and tell a friend about the chapter too :-) Privatemusings (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)I'm not actually involved in the election workings, and am just dropping these notes in to help try and spread the word :-) I welcome any or all comment too, but 'election related' stuff really is better suited to the meta pages :-)[reply]

Wikimedia UK 2.0 Vote

Hi you signed up as being interested in being a memeber of wikimedia UK 2.0. Just a reminder the that the vote for the inital board at m:Wikimedia UK v2.0/Vote ends next Saturday (September 25th).Geni 03:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Royal Monmouthshire Royal Engineers.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Royal Monmouthshire Royal Engineers.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Williams Baronets

Great edit. Have you tried AWB? Kittybrewster ☎ 10:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a fan of Windows or .NET, but I DL'd it the other day and then realised I'm not on the "chosen list". D'oh! Owain (talk) 10:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK v2.0

Hello! Thanks for showing an interest in Wikimedia UK v2.0. Formation of the company is currently underway under the official name "Wiki UK Limited", and we are hoping to start accepting membership in the near future. We have been drawing up a set of membership guidelines, determining what membership levels we'll have (we plan on starting off with just standard Membership, formerly known as Guarantor Membership, with supporting membership / friends scheme coming later), who can apply for membership (everyone), what information we'll collect on the application form, why applications may be rejected, and data retention. Your input on all of this would be appreciated. We're especially after the community's thoughts on what the membership fee should be. Please leave a message on the talk page with your thoughts.

Also, we're currently setting up a monthly newsletter to keep everyone informed about the to-be-Chapter's progress. If you would like to receive this newsletter, please put your username down on this page.

Thanks again. Mike Peel (talk) 19:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC) (Membership Secretary, Wikimedia UK [Proposed])[reply]

Wiki UK Ltd Membership applications now invited!

Hello,

It gives me great pleasure to announce that Wiki UK Limited is now inviting membership applications! You can download the application form in PDF format from meta:Image:Wiki_UK_Ltd_membership_application_form.pdf

Information is given on the form about membership fees (£12/year standard, £6 for concessions); these need to be paid by cheque initially, although we hope to accept other forms of payment in the future. Applications should be submitted to me at the address given on the form. If you have any queries about the application process, please let me know.

We will formally start accepting members once we have a bank account, as we cannot process membership fees until that time. We will be submitting our application for a bank account in the very near future, and we hope to have this set up by the end of December at the latest.

Thank you for your support so far; I look forward to receiving your membership application.

Mike Peel (talk) 21:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Membership Secretary, Wiki UK Limited

P.S. if you haven't already, please subscribe to our newsletter! See meta:Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Newsletter for more information and to subscribe.

Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.

Newport station

STOP YOUR VANDALISM NOW, or you WILL be blocked. Welshleprechaun (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look pal, reverting unilateral page moves and removing crap information that you have inserted is not vandalism, it is defence of WP polices. Please read them. Owain (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot just move them based on your opinion, or what you think the name should be, or without discussing it. Welshleprechaun (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which is exactly what Shazz0r did! I am attempting to move the article back to Newport railway station as per the consensus on the talk page! Owain (talk) 16:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't, you have moved it to three different names - High Street, station1 and Great Western Line. Welshleprechaun (talk) 16:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in an attempt to move it away from the incorrect name whilst the Newport railway station was speedily deleted freeing it up to me moved to. Please assist! Owain (talk) 16:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]