User talk:Verseshown

Welcome!

Hello, Verseshown, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Doc Quintana (talk) 20:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of West_Midlands_bus_routes_51,_X51_and_951A

An editor has nominated West_Midlands_bus_routes_51,_X51_and_951A, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West_Midlands_bus_routes_51,_X51_and_951A and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Okip 23:38, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hi There. I was wondering what your sources were for the changes to the 27, 49, 61, 61, 63 & 84 Bus routes? Thanks, (Umbongo91 (talk) 20:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for that Link, I always used the 2 weekly publication but that thing is useless, I didn't know you could search by the actual day! You're a star.

On this subject, I found this dated 28th May:

PD0001374/254 - DIAMOND BUS COMPANY LTD, HALLBRIDGE WAY, TIPTON ROAD, TIVIDALE, WARLEY, B69 3HW

Variation Accepted: Operating between The Maypole and Cotteridge & Northfield given service number 19 effective from 25-Jul-2010. To amend Route.

That to me implies the 19 is to be curtailed in Northfield, no longer going to Longbridge, My haunch is that they're reintroducing the old 27 and 44 routes south of Northfield after so many complaints, but then that would leave Wychall unserved, unless they reinstate the 634 between Northfield and Pool Farm?

Also, ever thought of joining Skycraper City? It's strictly speaking an architecture & urban development forum, but the Birmingham section has expanded to cover just about everything including Transport, it's the closest we have to a Bus Users Forum online.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?s=8a694f412b203253b49e0c470e9cbc3a&t=239189

Thanks, (Umbongo91 (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Proposal for changing List of NXWM routes

I was thinking exactly the same thing! I'm not sure either how NXWM think it is a good idea to renumber different area routes in this way.

I've been starting to think it might be easier on this page if the routes were listed by 'area', rather than by number.

For example:

Birmingham & Solihull services (containing the original 1-199 numberings)

Dudley area services (containing the existing 200-299 numberings, as well as the X96?)

Walsall area services (containg the 'new' Walsall 1-99 numberings, as well as any existing 300-399 numberings)

West Bromwich area services (containg the existing 400-499 numberings)

Wolverhampton area services (containing the 'new' Wolverhampton 1-99 numberings, as well as any existing 500-599 numberings)

School & Works services (containing the existing 700-899 numberings)

It might also be worth incorporating any 600-699 and 900-999 numberings into the above categories. Its a bit difficult to categorise these routes as 'limited stop' or 'express' services, as the 966 is an obvious exception, likewise for the 636 service as it is neither a 'mini-bus' or 'subsidised' service any more.

Looking forward to hearing your input! Showbizkid (talk) 19:16, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that did cross my mind too, it might get confusing if routes get duplicated in different sections, I suppose they could stay in their 'historical' section for now, but as there probably aren't that many (eg service 126 serves both Birmingham and Wolverhampton) it might not hurt to list them twice, we'd just have to see how it works out.

Showbizkid (talk) 12:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Birmingham Coach Station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hull (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:18, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Birmingham Coach Station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]