User talk:Saga City/Archive 2008-2009

Jurassic Way

A tag has been placed on Jurassic Way, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

The trail does not exist

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. SuzanneKn (talk) 19:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I put the correct reason on this, but I can't seem to find any links on this when I googled it. Does it actually exit SuzanneKn (talk) 19:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See my note on the discussion page Saga City (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I left you the note about unreliable sources you will probably remember that the ramblers association was not linked up properly. SuzanneKn (talk) 17:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Royal progress

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Royal progress, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Royal progress

An article that you have been involved in editing, Royal progress, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal progress. Thank you. Caerwine Caer’s whines 02:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Royal progress

A tag has been placed on Royal progress requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article consists of a dictionary definition that has been transwikied and the author information recorded.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Swanbridge redirect

Hi, I have updated and expanded the Sully Island page over the last couple of weeks. At the moment you have Swanbridge redirected to Sully and it would sit far better associated with Sully Island, as they are adjacent to each other. I have tried to work out how to do this but the wiki redirect instruction page seems to be written in serbo-croat...well I cannot make head nor tail of it anyway, even with my 138 IQ. Any chance you can change the redirect for me? Many thanks 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 15:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Jane Howard?

If I am reading things correctly, you are the editor who added the offspring (issues, if you like) to the Lady Jane Howard article. What was your source? I am very interested as I am doing genealogy of Westmorelands in the U.S., and there seems to be a lack of consensus on whether Thomas Neville Westmoreland was son of Charles Neville, 6th Earl of Westmorland or his distant cousin Edmund Neville, who claimed the title of 7th Earl of Westmoreland. If you have a definitive source, that would be great.--Crazytonyi (talk) 03:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Normans and Wellow

Hi Saga City. I changed a link in Wellow (Notts) from Norman Architecture to Normans, 'cos it (the Castle) is a small round mound and not architecture. Is that OK? Or maybe it needs a link to Motte and Bailey? Ning-ning (talk) 10:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xena: Warrior Princess

Xena: Warrior Princess has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Rushford

The new place you added is red link. Can you please start the article? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 10:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meads

Thanks for checking into the article on Meads (in Eastbourne). Can you pse explain the CLR in curly brackets that is at the foot of the page? Regards from Mikeo1938 (talk) 14:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no techie so can't explain with any precision. However the clr template clears the formatting and, in this case, caused the reference paragraph to appear below the picture rather than to its right. In other words it was only cosmetic. Of course if you are using a larger font size than medium the effect may well be invisibe. Hope this helps, Best Wishes Saga City (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All understood and noted. VMT. Mikeo1938 (talk) 16:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found poetry

Hey there. I noticed you edited found poetry a couple of years ago. I also notice the article has since stagnated. I was wondering if you help me improve the article by expanding it, adding citations, etc. or at least adding it to your watchlist, as it is has changed into a hotbed for vandalism. --Justpassin (talk) 23:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Places in Somerset

Hi, You've added several red links to List of places in Somerset which, as a far as I can find out, are tiny hamlets &, in one case, a single farm, which I don't think meet the notability criteria for their own articles. Therefore I've been doing redirects to the civil parish they are in - hope this is OK? if not please revert & start the relevant stubs (& I don't think they will ever be more than stubs).— Rod ^talk 11:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rothley

It was marked as a G6 speedy (housekeeping/non-controversial redirect), and the article can now be found at Rothley, Leicestershire. Daniel Case (talk) 14:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A roads

Thank you for your comment on User talk:217.36.107.9. I don't know if this was prompted by the discussion on Talk:A4018 road, or whether there are other examples. In the case of A4018 road, there was an AfD debate in 2006, which resulted in a pretty clear Keep. Like you, I have a problem with attempts to circumvent consensus by using redirects. Mhockey (talk) 13:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two fairly basic issues:

Redirects are not deletion.
A subject cannot reasonably have its own article unless there's an article there to be written in the first place.

I would also like to see some evidence of any "long-standing consensus" that all A-roads are notable, and the hard facts that back it up. 217.36.107.9 (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/B roads in the United Kingdom for discussion on what is not notable, and therefore the opposite is true for what is notable, therefore all A roads and motorways are notable. Seth Whales (talk) 19:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also I cannot find a single case of a successful deletion proposal of an GB or NI A road. As to the assertion that 'Redirects are not deletion' it is the content that is deleted if, as in the various cases by the anonymous contributor, no content is moved from the original article to the new target. Saga City (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of civil parishes in Somerset

Hi, You added an "incomplete list" tag to List of civil parishes in Somerset. I believe this list to be complete unless you know of some others which I don't know about?— Rod ^talk 13:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VSCC edits

Hey, I added a bit to Vintage Sports-Car Club and even created Veteran Car Club of Great Britain from some info in the sources I dug up. Did you have a direction you wanted the first of the two articles to go or some offline sources that might help improve either of them? It's not really my field, per se, but I've got some knowledge. Protonk (talk) 02:20, 24 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) 19:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

B Roads

Hello Saga City

Thank you for your message! , Things are clearer now, I hope UK roads project community will now settle back down to more Constructive contributions. stavros1 ♣ 18:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eel Pie Records

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Eel Pie Records, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oo7565 (talk) 18:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YOB instead of DOB. Check instructions

Hi. Concerning this edit of yours, I would like to inform you that for article pages we use Category:Year of birth missing instead of Category:Date of birth missing. If, there is a reason to add the latter, please add it to the Talk page instead but first read WP:PRIVACY and the instructions in the categories above. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of civil parishes in Devon

Hello Saga City. I have reverted your edit noting that Bishop's Clyst had been formed from the merger of Clyst St Mary and Sowton in 1976. Although the two civil parishes may form a combined parish council (sometimes called a joint, common or grouped parish council), they remain legal entities in their own right and each must hold an annual parish meeting (this will usually be immediately before the annual meeting of the combined parish council). They will remain two civil parishes until East Devon District Council makes a legal order to combine the two civil parishes. In practice, this rarely happens and this confusing legal anomaly is likely to remain for decades. Occasionally, after many years of existence, a combined parish council may be dissolved and the two civil parishes then resume acting as individual authorities, either as two parish councils, as two parish meetings, or even as one of each.

It is for these reasons that Ordnance Survey, Office for National Statistics and The Electoral Commission (see page 37 : 5 : Clyst Valley Ward) all list the two civil parishes separately. The position is fairly accurately described at Clyst St Mary, but the entry at Bishop's Clyst probably needs amending. Please reply here if you wish to leave a message (it makes it easier to follow conversations than darting between Talk pages). I'll keep a watch out! Skinsmoke (talk) 16:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice; fell into a trap - should have thought more about it. Can you check my re-wording of Bishop's Clyst? Best Wishes Saga City (talk) 15:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. It's a common mistake and all too easy to make, particularly when working from a list of parish councils provided by a district council. The only reason I picked up on it was that I've spent six months working on all the sub-pages at List of civil parishes in England to get them corrected and referenced! Must be mad! The rewording is fine by the way. Skinsmoke (talk) 23:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bolding redirects

Thanks for re-bolding Burton Pynsent on the Curry Rivel article. This one one of several redirects where the bolding was removed (check history around 14th June) by User:Jenuk1985 who argued WP:MOS didn't allow this. I discussed this on their talk page and tried to start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Using_boldface_for_redirects but didn't get any responses. Could you persuade the user or contribute to the discussion?— Rod ^talk 10:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Millbridge

Hi, noticed that you had created a dab page for Millbridge and was expecting to find the three UK ones listed in List of United Kingdom locations: Mid-Mn but only the Surrey one appears. Should the other two be added? Keith D (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, seeking support to keep regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Epping murders. Do you have an opinion on that? Thanks Ajayvius (talk) 09:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northamptonshire

Hi Saga City/Archive 2008-2009! A Wikipedia:WikiProject Northamptonshire has now been created. If you wish to help out improving articles relating to anything in the county, please don't hesitate to go to the page and sign up! --Kudpung (talk) 13:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northamptonshire

Hi Saga City/Archive 2008-2009! A Top Priority article you have been involved with has many issues and urgently needs improving. If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Northamptonshire, address the different points if you can, and leave any comments there. (This is a generic message. if it has been placed on your talk page inadvertantly, please ignore it.) --Kudpung --Kudpung (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]