User talk:StaniforthHistorian

This is StaniforthHistorian's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: James Hounsfield (October 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Frayae was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:James Hounsfield and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:James Hounsfield, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:47, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, StaniforthHistorian! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:47, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nate Staniforth (October 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Need more news sources on the subject like [1] [2] [3]. He wrote a book and hosted a discovery channel show, but years are not specified. Is he involved in other projects. Need his appearance on the Today Show. [4]

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nate Staniforth and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Nate Staniforth, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:James Hounsfield

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, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:James Hounsfield, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, 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. Legacypac (talk) 23:45, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: James Hounsfield (October 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:

We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at James Hounsfield instead.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:James Hounsfield and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:James Hounsfield, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nate Staniforth moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Nate Staniforth, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:39, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nate Staniforth (2) (October 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bkissin was:

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Nate Staniforth, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nate Staniforth (2) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Nate Staniforth (2), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bkissin (talk) 15:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nate Staniforth has been accepted

Nate Staniforth, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:28, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cox Macro

Hi StaniforthHistorian, thanks for this very interesting article, which I noticed after you added a Macro link to the Peter Tillemans page I started. I've formatted and styled the text so it conforms to Wikipedia style, although considerable work still needs to be done. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 21:04, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I'm still trying to get to grips with article creations so I appreciate your help, Cox Macro is a distant relation of mine through his daughters husband William Staniforth so I wanted to put all of my sources to use. Thanks again. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 21:27, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Staniforth (1832-1894), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hull (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:26, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Church of St. Winifred, Stainton) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Church of St. Winifred, Stainton.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

This is a useful stub. I hope of course that you'll go on to add some more reliably-cited detail to the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Church of St, James, Braithwell) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Church of St, James, Braithwell.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

I've linked to the Wikimedia Commons category and Wikidata record of the building, and added tags on the talk page. Looks good otherwise.

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

I've also moved it to Church of St James, Braithwell (no comma). Blythwood (talk) 18:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blythwood (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

St. Mary's Church of the Assumption, Kinnegad

Hi. Quick question here. The listing is in the name of "Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, Main Street, Kinnegad", but the parish website is for the "Church of the Assumption". Is this the same church? Blythwood (talk) 18:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes this is the same church, there seemed to be some conflicting information, when it was originally constructed it was simply known as St. Mary's, but as you stated, the website names it simply Church of the Assumption, while other sources name it Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, this is the only parish church in Kinnegad and all of the addresses are to the same church, if a rename is in order then certainly feel free. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've now looked on Google Maps and the address is the same. Thanks for the reply. Sounds like it's best to keep to the current name. Strange that there's no source available on the renaming. Blythwood (talk) 19:18, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Church of St Aidan, Sheffield) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Church of St Aidan, Sheffield.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

I've linked to the pre-existing Wikimedia Commons category. There seemed to be some mistake about the listing: it's listed grade II, not II*, at least according to the listing you cite. Maybe you were copying content from other articles you've written too fast?

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Blythwood (talk) 13:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~== A page you started (We All Need Christmas) has been reviewed and! ==~~

~~Thanks for creating We All Need Christmas.~~

~~I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.~~

~~Good start, wouldn't hurt to expand it a little and add more sources.~~

~~To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.~~

~~Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.~~

~~JC7V (talk) 20:17, 13 December 2018 (UTC)~~ I unreviewed the page. I endorse it being reviewed without being tagged (and will log my endorsement of it), but i don't feel strongly enough about it being notable to review myself without tagging it for deletion. I suggest you add more sources to show that it's notable as there is some doubt over it's notability. Thank you for all your good work, it's appreciated. JC7V (talk) 21:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs recorded by Def Leppard moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of songs recorded by Def Leppard, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 07:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (List of songs recorded by Def Leppard) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating List of songs recorded by Def Leppard.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

Good stat, please expand the opening paragraph per MOS for list articles

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

JC7V (talk) 16:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Staniforths (bakery)

Hello, StaniforthHistorian,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you:-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Staniforths (bakery), for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:49, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Midhope Reservoir

The OS map I'm looking at does not show the Little Don River serves as both the inflow and outflow. The reservoir is fed by streams; the river is 5 or so contour lines lower than the dam. The reservoir drains into the river via another stream. Are you sure your article is accurate?

You beat me to it, I completely missed the fact the brook to the north had a different name to the main Little Don River, I've made some amendments to the article. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Church of St. Patrick, Moate

Hello, StaniforthHistorian,

Thanks for creating Church of St. Patrick, Moate! I edit here too, under the username Britishfinance and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Good stub - would be interesting to hear a little more on it.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Britishfinance}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Britishfinance (talk) 10:04, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Potential COI for Staniforth articles

Hello, StaniforthHistorian. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. LovelyLillith (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Bamford Methodist Church

Hello, StaniforthHistorian,

Thanks for creating Bamford Methodist Church! I edit here too, under the username Britishfinance and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Nice stub article!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Britishfinance}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Britishfinance (talk) 16:58, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Church of St. Giles, Killamarsh) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Church of St. Giles, Killamarsh.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice stub article!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Britishfinance}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Britishfinance (talk) 19:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some suggestions on how to make this kind of article even better in future: it's best to put a sort on categories. As it is, this article on a church will appear in categories under "C" for "Church of...", but in a category about churches, people will be looking for it under "K" for "Killamarsh". Putting a sort term on relevant categories can fix this. It's good practice to cite the listing itself as this will be the authoritative source many people will want to read next. A lot of historic buildings without articles do have Wikimedia Commons categories which you can link to the article, and this was an example of that. Finally, again I notice that you seem to have added a category when it wasn't the right one: you added a category for it being a building in Yorkshire when it's actually in Derbyshire. I've changed all of these: you can see what I modified here. And it makes sense to put in an obvious link to the church's official website, rather than making this a hard-to-find citation. Hope that's all helpful! Blythwood (talk) 20:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blythwood, you've given me some great suggestions here, I'm certainly going to consider all of these from now on, thanks for taking the time to offer such useful tips. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 20:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great! You're doing some really great stuff adding content on corners of the UK and Ireland that aren't well-covered enough on Wikipedia: it's just a few extra things you can do that can make your articles even more useful to readers without really taking any extra time to put in. Blythwood (talk) 20:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Britishfinance:@Blythwood:Just wanted to thank both of you for your advice over the past few months, unfortunately due to me sockpuppeting an account created years ago all of my articles have been deemed as trash and have been deleted, I know you've followed along with my church and historic landmark page creations over the years so I thought I would at least make you both aware. Thanks again StaniforthHistorian (talk) 14:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:PorkyPig101DVD.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:08, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, StaniforthHistorian. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! LovelyLillith (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2019 (UTC) I did want to suggest that you check out WP:MINOR to better understand the appropriate time to mark edits as minor, because I've noticed the majority of your edits are marked that way. Basically if you are adding/deleting links, references, or changing the context of an article, it shouldn't be marked as minor; if you are making a change that any other editor would consider appropriate or wouldn't cause conflict, like a spelling correction or punctuation fix, that would be suitably marked as minor. Glad to have you helping out around here![reply]

Hello LovelyLillith, thank you very much for the welcome. I really appreciate the advise regarding minor edits, I will take it onboard from now on. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 21:02, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:UpTheRebelsremaster.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:TheRightsOfManWolfeTones.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:03, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:WolfeTonesChildofDestiny.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Frederick Greenwood (magistrate) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frederick Greenwood (magistrate) 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/Frederick Greenwood (magistrate) 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. Uninvited Company 22:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Church of St Luke, Scawthorpe) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Church of St Luke, Scawthorpe.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MainlyTwelve}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

MainlyTwelve (talk) 14:30, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Hawkswood Bog) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Hawkswood Bog.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

It'd be nice of you could expand this stub basing it upon the site synopsis at https://www.npws.ie/sites/default/files/protected-sites/synopsis/SY002355.pdf

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Nick Moyes}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Nick Moyes (talk) 00:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (John Hibbard (merchant)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating John Hibbard (merchant).

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MainlyTwelve}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

MainlyTwelve (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Looney Tunes Twouble Game Boy Color.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Mount Jessop Bog) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Mount Jessop Bog.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

All looks good. It would be nice to get some coordinates in so readers can click to see where it is?

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Girth Summit}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

GirthSummit _(blether) 15:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

eclectic good work

Hi, you seem to have eclectic interests! I noticed your new article about Holland Coffee, an Oklahoma entrepreneur(?) because it happened to link to some article that I had created, but then I can't quickly see any much pattern to your contributions. I myself happen to work mostly on historic sites in the United States, especially sites listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. If you happened to be interested in writing about Oklahoma historic sites, I would be very happy to collaborate somehow. Anyhow, thank your for your contribution, and I hope u keep up your good work! :) cheers, --Doncram (talk) 23:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram: Hey! Thanks for the comment, basically I was born in the midlands of ireland, grew up in England, and for the past 6 years I've lived in North Texas so as you can see I tend to have interests spread across the two countries and Texas (Usually Johnson County, Texas as that's where I've been living). I actually came across Holland Coffee after reading up on Richard Meredith Hart and fleshing out his article, Holland Coffee had a small legal case against him in wich Coffee won, but I noticed there was no article on him despite him being in the TSHA... and I actually looked into Richard Hart due to him having a listed building not far from where I live (I'm planning to make a page on the listed house tomorrow) StaniforthHistorian (talk) 23:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. TSHA = Texas state House of representatives? Definitely interesting people, anyhow. National Register of Historic Places listings in Johnson County, Texas and linked bluelinks and redlinks could sure use some work. I have recorded some tips into (and/or drawn from there myself) wp:NRHPHELP about doing NRHP articles (and specifically wp:NRHPHELPTX about doing Texas ones); perhaps you could find that useful. Maybe i will try to fix up some of those, too. Feel free to ping me if I could possibly help on anything there. I have seen your username around somewhere, maybe in AFDs or maybe in Texas articles? Yes, your editing in Ireland/England confused me. :) Random fact: despite never visiting, I happen to have developed almost all of Registered Buildings of the Isle of Man myself. cheers, --Doncram (talk) 01:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram: TSHA The Texas State Historical Association's Handbook of Texas, it's an incredible resource, there's been times where I've drove through tiny incorporated communities and when I've looked them up there's no mention on Wikipedia, but 10/10 times it'll be mentioned in the handbook, a good example of this is the article I made for Parker, Johnson County, Texas. I'm definitely going to checkout your help pages, I've only just started working on US landmarks so they'll be a big help. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Cloonoolish Bog) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Cloonoolish Bog.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

You love your bogs!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Girth Summit}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

GirthSummit _(blether) 18:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: Thanks for the message! Blame that on my summers spent with my family in the Midlands of Ireland! I have family over there that to this day use Peat from those bogs to heat their homes. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 18:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I used to go on holidays to my friend's family home in Donegal - there's nothing like the smell of a peat fire, it's fantastic! GirthSummit _(blether) 18:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Clooncullaun Bog) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Clooncullaun Bog.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

I'm marking this page as reviewed too, as the refs confirm its status as a Natural Heritage Area. One thing I couldn't see though was the mention of it being a 'raised bog' in either of the sources - did that come from another source? It would be good to have that sourced.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Girth Summit}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

GirthSummit _(blether) 18:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: I've just referenced the PDF regarding raised bogs which lists this particular bog. I've also just put together an article on Turf fires if you wouldn't mind reviewing it. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - thanks for adding the PDF source, that looks good.

I went to take a look at Turf fire, but I see that User:Onel5969 got there before me and reviewed it. It's a nice article, but the sourcing could be improved - it's primarily blogs, which wouldn't qualify as RS. I did a quick Google Books search and found this, this and a few other sources that might help to beef it up a bit. I also wonder whether you've looked at Peat - there are a lot of good sources in that article, that could potentially be used to expand your new one - it also covers some of the ecological issues (Peat#Peat_fires) which would probably be relevant. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 10:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks for the encouragement over my bog articles @Girth Summit:, unfortunately I got caught out for using a second account so the close to 100 bog articles are completely gone, I hope someone might be able to recreate them in the future, until then thanks for all of your help. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 14:04, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Connemara Bog Complex) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Connemara Bog Complex.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 21:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ellis Benson

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.

A tag has been placed on Ellis Benson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://thetexasunderground.blogspot.com/2013/11/ellis-benson.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, 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. S Philbrick (Talk) 19:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For creating music articles

Please read WP:NCMDAB and MOS:CT for the correct capitalisation and amount of disambiguation needed when making music articles for future reference. Thanks. Ss112 04:55, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

StaniforthHistorian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would request that my ban be revoked as I feel I had created some useful articles over the past few months, I have grown to understand and learn the rules of Wikipedia and I feel the mistakes I had made in the past will not happen again, the deletion of many of my pages, especially those on Irish, English and Texan history has left a lot of red links, and I want to stress that I have learned from my past mistakes. I have a passion for Wikipedia and knowing my pages are gone has left me feeling rather empty. I made some rather foolish mistakes in the past and these will not be repeated. Thank you for your time.

Decline reason:

You have not addressed the reason for your block. Note that every single edit from this account is a violation of WP:EVADE and therefore by definition, abusive. Yamla (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Yamla: I fully understand why I was blocked, it was an extremely foolish act to try and get around a ban, I made a lot of stupid mistakes on my former accounts and I simply wanted to start fresh, I hope the articles I have created through this username reflect my desire to share knowledge, I made many pages for listed churches and protected bogs in Ireland and it would be a shame to see those suddenly disappear like this. I want to stress again, I understand what I did was incredibly stupid and violated the rules, but I hope I can find a way to redeem myself and my reputation on Wikipedia. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 20:44, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

StaniforthHistorian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I fully understand why I was blocked, it was an extremely foolish act to try and get around a ban, I made a lot of stupid mistakes on my former accounts and I simply wanted to start fresh, I hope the articles I have created through this username reflect my desire to share knowledge, I made many pages for listed churches and protected bogs in Ireland and it would be a shame to see those suddenly disappear like this. I want to stress again, I understand what I did was incredibly stupid and violated the rules, but I hope I can find a way to redeem myself and my reputation on Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

You'll need to request unblock from your original account. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 21:11, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

That’s the problem, that original account was one I made years ago, I wasn’t even living in the same country and I was a teenager, I have since matured a lot since then but I am 100% unable to access that original FreebirdBiker account. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 21:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpgordon: StaniforthHistorian (talk) 21:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

StaniforthHistorian (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would request that my ban be revoked as I feel I had created some useful articles over the past few months, I have grown to understand and learn the rules of Wikipedia and I feel the mistakes I had made in the past will not happen again, the deletion of many of my pages, especially those on Irish, English and Texan history has left a lot of red links, and I want to stress that I have learned from my past mistakes. I have a passion for Wikipedia and knowing my pages are gone has left me feeling rather empty. I made some rather foolish mistakes in the past and these will not be repeated. I fully understand why I was blocked, it was an extremely foolish act to try and get around a ban, I made a lot of stupid mistakes on my former accounts and I simply wanted to start fresh, I hope the articles I have created through this username reflect my desire to share knowledge, I made many pages for listed churches and protected bogs in Ireland and it would be a shame to see those suddenly disappear like this. I want to stress again, I understand what I did was incredibly stupid and violated the rules, but I hope I can find a way to redeem myself and my reputation on Wikipedia. I also need to stress that my original account under the username FreebirdBiker is no longer accessible meaning I literally cannot use the original account I was banned for sock puppeting. I appreciate the severity of my actions and I truly do hope to start fresh under my StaniforthHistorian username, I am also very concerned over the loss of articles many of which include historic listed landmarks in Texas as well as landmarks in England. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As noted by Bbb23, your only path to an unblock is the standard offer. Abiding by this will show that you are capable of abiding by Wikipedia guidelines. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You didn't just make "stupid mistakes" on your former accounts. You made a very large mistake in creating this account and happily evading your block for months. It's only now when you've been caught that you are suddenly remorseful. You can look at the terms of WP:SO and request an unblock six months from now if you believe at that time you've met them. There's no guarantee that you will be unblocked then, but what is fairly certain is you're not going to be unblocked now.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:50, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: @Bbb23: Understood, I will accept my punishment, what I do still feel strongly about however is the loss of the articles I had created on historic landmarks, I feel those should be reviewed regardless of my personal actions, is there any chance the G5 could be reverted and reviews carried out on the articles, for example Looney Tunes Cartoons had many other edits by other users but it was completely deleted. The same goes for pages such as Hill County Courthouse. I don't agree with the logic that all of my created articles are trash based on my past actions. StaniforthHistorian (talk) 13:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the section you posted below about your articles and G5. You have zero say in the application of G5 to your creations. Any more of this nonsense, and I'll revoke talk page access.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:52, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]