User talk:DragonofBatley

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sutton Coldfield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shenstone.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Scroll of the Dragon

Hello, DragonofBatley. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Scroll of the Dragon".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 00:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley, County Durham: what info to include in section 'Transport links'?

Greetings, DragonofBatley.

I propose to start a topic about this on the Stanley talk page so that we can discuss it. OK for you?

Cheers, —Protalina (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DragonofBatley: What do you think of the idea of putting the now-closed railway stations in History? Protalina (talk) 05:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with it but I've also included the nearest railway stations to the town. DragonofBatley (talk) 05:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, shall I delete the historical ones from Transport links? I already put them in history, and will later add a citation for the closure date. Protalina (talk) 05:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added citation, but don't have a copy of Butt's Directory, so only have page no. for West Stanley (from the article). Do you know page no. for Annfield Plain? Thanks, —Protalina (talk) 11:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Links to disambiguation pages

Please check your page creations like Stillington railway station to make sure that all your links go to the right pages. I've fixed your two links to the Stillington disambiguation page.

There is an easy way to avoid linking to disambiguation pages: if you go to "Preferences", "Gadgets", and look under "Appearance" you'll see "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" towards the bottom of the section. Select that tickbox, and whenever you Preview a page you'll be able to see whether you've accidentally linked to a disambiguation page.

If you aren't using that gadget, then just take more care to check every link you add to make sure it's correct. Thanks. PamD 09:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A thought: if Stillington line is worth a red link, perhaps add it to List_of_closed_railway_lines_in_the_United_Kingdom and redirect it there? PamD 09:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Significant coverage

Please read WP:GNG. Notability requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. All of your railway station articles that I redirected fail to meet this standard. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No appropriate discussions need to be undertaken before a full redirect. That's how wikipedia works DragonofBatley (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Demons Bridge railway station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Demons Bridge railway station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demons Bridge railway station until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Stillington railway station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stillington railway station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stillington railway station until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Saltersgate Cottage railway station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Saltersgate Cottage railway station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saltersgate Cottage railway station until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:57, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Simpasture railway station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Simpasture railway station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simpasture railway station until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:03, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that you have made an edit summary or a comment that did not appear to be appropriate, civil, or otherwise constructive, and it may have been removed. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Geschichte (talk) 10:14, 18 June 2024 (UTC) This is not the way to go forward. Geschichte (talk) 11:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Stillington railway station. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Stockton (S&D) railway station. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. It appears that you created Stockton (S&D) railway station on 4 June by copying other editors' work from the article Stockton railway station (S&D) which had existed since 2022. That is not how to move an article. Any further such copying will be considered as disruptive editing. Thanks. PamD 08:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Please do not move articles to different titles which do not comply with WP:ENGLANDPLACE, ie Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#England. This says "Where disambiguation is required, placename, ceremonial county is normally used." You have recently moved Stanhope, County Durham to Stanhope, England and Halifax, West Yorkshire to Halifax, United Kingdom. Both have been reverted as undiscussed moves. In both cases the existing title was correct. "Only one in England" is not a reason to change the disambiguation: placename disambiguation doesn't work in quite the same way as normal disambiguation, but follows specific rules (and it was incorrect for Stanhope, as there is a Stanhope, Kent).

Continuing to move articles to incorrect titles will be considered as disruptive editing. PamD 07:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Stockton (S&D) railway station

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Stockton (S&D) railway station. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Stockton (Stockton & Darlington Railway) railway station. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Stockton (Stockton & Darlington Railway) railway station. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. PamD 07:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above, of course, is the standard automatically-generated message. But it boils down to: I've nominated the duplicate for speedy deletion. If you were trying to do a cut-and-paste page move, please remember that that isn't the way to move a page to a better title. If you think a page needs moved and can't do it simply, use WP:RM. You appear to have copied other people's work into this new page, with no acknowledgement, and that's not the way to do it. Thanks. PamD 10:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've also just discovered the helpful Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations) or WP:UKSTATION which states that mid-title disambiguation is now deprecated: I think it may have been an earlier convention. So Stockton (Stockton & Darlington Railway) railway station was not a good choice of title. PamD 10:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging

Just for your information, your ping in this edit will not have worked: for a ping to work properly you need to sign your post in the same edit as the ping is added. It's easy to forget. (@Pi.1415926535: notifying Pi... of the missed ping.) PamD 16:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St Asaph, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Holywell.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

Please remember not to link dates, per MOS:UNLINKDATES. I've unlinked them in St Edmund's Church, Lincoln and St Lawrence's Church, Lincoln, and also added the articles to the dab pages at St Edmund's Church and St Lawrence's Church, which will make it easier for readers to find them. Thanks. PamD 07:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 8

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Lowestoft

added links pointing to Gunton and Corton

Great Yarmouth

added a link pointing to Bradwell

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please note WP:ENGLANDPLACE. PamD 18:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to St Thomas Church, Swansea has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. PamD 21:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kirton, Lincolnshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spalding.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User pages

While editors have very considerable latitude regarding material on their User Page, I think the comment you currently have on yours is almost certainly in contravention of the requirement not to encourage violence. I believe it goes beyond a "mere statement of support for [a] controversial regime". Can I ask that you consider whether it is appropriate to have such a comment on your user page. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 10:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've not responded to this. I remain of the view that your comment re. Hamas constitutes a "statement that seems to advocate, encourage, or condone acts of violence. ("Acts of violence" includes all forms of violence but does not include mere statements of support for controversial groups or regimes that some may interpret as an encouragement of violence)", in contravention of Advocacy or support of grossly improper behaviors with no project benefit. If you're unwilling to engage, I'll flag the issue elsewhere. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 15:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its how I feel about Hamas since they murdered people and have had violent progests all over world encouraging hate towards Jewish people and Israel. I support Israel. Im protected by WP: Free Speech and Hamas are evil terrorists. If i cant support Israel like some do on here, then Palestine users would be allowed to support Hamas and Palestine. DragonofBatley (talk) 16:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the second paragraph of WP:Free Speech - “you have no ‘right’ to insist that Wikipedia carry what you write”. Your comment is a clear incitement to violence, and is inappropriate for Wikipedia, per the UserPage Guideline I have already quoted. I would ask that you remove it. KJP1 (talk) 16:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We'll agree to disagree but it's been changed. Now gone thanks DragonofBatley (talk) 19:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Belmont Rural, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Belmont Abbey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Currently"

Please don't use "currently", as in statements like " is currently represented by Cllr Susan Boulter." in Whitecross, Hereford. We can't be sure that you or any other editor will check and/or update that name after the next local elections, so this is likely to become incorrect over time. See MOS:CURRENTLY and WP:RELTIME, and consider using {{As of}} or stating the date of their election ("X was elected as councillor in yyyy[ref]"), to make the encyclopedia future-proof. Thanks. PamD 07:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are continuing to do this, as in your creation of Boley Park. Please stop this disruptive editing against the MOS. Unless you are certain that you, or someone else, will update all these articles after the next local elections, you are setting Wikipedia up to become out of date. PamD 11:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should check half of Worcestershires articles which have one dated to 2007/09 and no new updates since. I think it was St Johns or Henwick. I only updated them since I was adding areas of Worcester. Additionally, its far from disruptive to say currently. If i said is represented by. That be just as disruptive. So really some editors need to fact check some articles and maybe update accordingly DragonofBatley (talk) 15:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that there are badly-written and out of date articles elsewhere is no excuse for adding to the future problem by making statements which will become incorrect after the next council election or even by-election. If you use the wording "As of September 2024 it was represented by ...", this will always be true. That's why "currently" should almost always be avoided, as per MOS:CURRENTLY and WP:RELTIME. Please stop adding statements which will become untrue over time: we're writing an encyclopedia for the future, not just for this year. Thanks. PamD 18:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ceremonial counties

When in the case of area of Lichfield the place is in the administrative county its not normally appropriate to use the word "ceremonial" as it suggests that place isn't in the administrative county such as like Stoke-on-Trent thanks. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Larry Steinbachek for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Larry Steinbachek, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Steinbachek until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi DragonofBatley. Thank you for your work on Hartfordbeach. Another editor, I dream of horses, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

You made a mistake even experienced Wikipedians make. The hamlet article you meant to link is at Hamlet (place). Hamlet is the Shakespeare play.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|I dream of horses}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah i forgot about the play of the same name sorry. Thanks for correcting it. I will remember to link the Hamlet (place) link in future. Thanks again DragonofBatley (talk) 11:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Making your articles findable

Please remember that if you create an article with a disambiguated title like Witton, Northwich you need to add it to the disambiguation page at Witton so that readers can find it. I've done this one, but I see you have created quite a few other articles for wards etc which still need dab page entries. Thanks. PamD 22:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 21

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Brownhills

added links pointing to Springhill and Sandhills

Walsall

added a link pointing to Al-Farouq

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sleaford, Newark-on-Trent for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sleaford, Newark-on-Trent is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sleaford, Newark-on-Trent until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PamD 07:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mosques of Leicestershire has been nominated for renaming

Category:Mosques of Leicestershire has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PamD 10:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mosques of Lincolnshire has been nominated for renaming

Category:Mosques of Lincolnshire has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PamD 11:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abbey, Lincoln, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln Prison.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Areas of Peterborough

A tag has been placed on Category:Areas of Peterborough indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Theddlethorpe All Saints

Could you explain why this is in Category:Areas of Mablethorpe and Sutton? It seems to be a separate parish, with no mention of Mablethorpe or Sutton in its article. Similary, why is Hogsthorpe in Category:Areas of Skegness, when the only mentions of Skegness is that Hogsthorpe is 7 miles north of it, the post town, and part of the constituency name? etc. PamD 16:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seathorne, on the other hand, really does appear to be in the civil parish of Skegness, so Category:Areas of Skegness would be reasonable if there was any mention of the parish in the article, but there isn't. [Mapit] or OS mapping confirms that it's in the parish, but it's in neither infobox nor text. The category should not be added unless supported in the text of the article.

When you create a category such as Category:Areas of Skegness it would be helpful to define "Skegness" in a note on the category page: is it the civil parish or what? Thanks. PamD 16:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Suburb"s

What justification is there for describing Station, Boston as a suburb? It appears not to exist in any role other than as a local government electoral ward. (And this is just one of many examples). PamD 10:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've raised this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#What's_a_suburb?, for info. PamD 10:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay lets just put this in theory. If somewhere like Fenside or Staniland has existed for 50-100 years or even Lincoln's Moorland or Hartsholme. And surveys from 80-100 years referred to them as suburbs or areas. Then a defacto is suburb or district. So a district, area or suburb ususally mean the same thing. One could argue how Scotforth or Chorlton-cum-Medlock are suburbs when they were their own settlements. They just were and became wards or suburbs. Even Highbridge becoming one with Burham on Sea despite Highbridge never losing its town status. Or Sutton on Sea and Mablethorpe.

Point is wards and suburbs have zero difference other than being used for council elections and demographics. Some areas are even wards and suburbs. So i dont see an issue. If this is one, then maybe Wikipedia should have a topic wide debate on its defenition since towns or villages are now becoming suburbs of larger cities towns and conurbations as is the case with North Hykeham and Lincoln urban area. Dewsbury Kirklees Wakefield Bradford Leeds and Calderdale Huddersfield or Rotherham and Sheffield. DragonofBatley (talk) 12:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Station, Boston for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Station, Boston is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Station, Boston until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

10mmsocket (talk) 13:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Areas of Boston, England has been nominated for renaming

Category:Areas of Boston, England has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PamD 15:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Austerby for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Austerby, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austerby until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Haven Village for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Haven Village is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haven Village until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PamD 12:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kirton railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spalding.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi DragonofBatley. Thank you for your work on Witham, Boston. Another editor, Sir MemeGod, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good job! I didn't know that the United Kingdom also had a "Boston", I was a bit confused at first. :D

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Sir MemeGod}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

MemeGod _chat 18:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hykeham Memorial for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hykeham Memorial is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hykeham Memorial until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PamD 14:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Methodist Church, Bardney

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Methodist Church, Bardney, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]