User talk:Jmrtn13

Can you explain who you are? Are ypu this user? Cheers, Je tL ov er 22:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jmrtn13

Hi JetLover,

Sorry; yes that's me.

Sorry, but that's a blockable offence called sockpuppetry. Cheers, Je tL ov er 23:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No not Gothcha115

Hi JetLover,

Sorry I misunderstood. I thought your question refered to the heading now I notice you were refering to the link.

No I'm not Gotcha115. I only have the one account viz. Jmrtn13

See... still lots to learn.

Off to bed now. Have a nice evening.

Jmrtn13 00:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what's the verdict JetLover

Am I to be hanged, merely chastised or barred???

Maybe the juries still out.

Whatever; please have the courteously to let me know.

Jmrtn13 23:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Station Manager's House.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Station Manager's House.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Nice to meet you

Hi Jmrtn13, Thanks for sticking around despite the early confusion about your account. Did you read the page about sockpuppets? It seems obvious that you're not one, so don't worry much about that early misunderstanding. I don't think it was anything that you did... maybe somebody just misread a page history or clicked the wrong buttons.

As for your contributions, it looks like you're off to a good start. The article you created was done well, even though it's a short article. I did make one change: [1]. That made the references that you added actually visible at the bottom of the page. Also, they aren't formatted as nicely as they could be. Check out the page on Wikipedia:Citation_templates to see how to make references that are easier to understand where the link will take a reader. You can use them like this:

<ref name="NYTimes">{{cite news |url = www.nytimes..... |title = title of article | first = Joe | last = Clark | date = 2007-10-10 | accessdate = 2007-07-21 }}</ref>

Or another appropriate citation template. Not every article uses them, but I think most editors are readers like the format of the reference list when these template are used.

Good wikilinking at the English Colts Club Knockout Cup.

Take a look at how the next editor changed your comment at [2]. They moved it to the bottom of the discussion page and marked it as being unsigned. So, discussion continues at the bottom of the article talk pages (or underneath whatever message you're replying to. You've been pretty good about signing otherwise though, I think.

You also asked about the redirect thing. What you're referring to is "reversing a redirect". What would have to happen is to delete the current redirect that is taking the place of the correct name, move the page with the wrong name to the page with the correct name, and then make the old page a redirect to the correct page. I could do this for you in the next couple of days, but I'm a bit busy until probably Wednesday. Keep up the good editing. If you're looking for some points for improvement, I think at this point, just some general guidance is enough to keep you in the right direction, if I notice anything specific I'll always let you know :-). Here is some good reading: Wikipedia:Article_development, Wikipedia:List_of_policies (probably don't have time to read each in depth, but the bullet point list here is a good start). For some examples of what a great article looks like, check out Wikipedia:Featured_articles and Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria.

Talk to you soon! Sancho 17:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait! I realized that you just wanted to create an article over top of a redirect. In that case, go to Blennerhasset. You'll see that it redirects you to Blennerhasset and Torpenhow. But, you can click on the little link under the title that says: (Redirected from Blennerhasset). It will take you to this page: [3]. At that page, you can create the article about the hamlet/village that you want to create. If you're really ambitious, you can try to get it mentioned on the main page by following the steps at WP:DYK. I can help you with any questions you have about that process. Sancho 18:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hay Sancho,

I'm had a look around your suggestions. Boy is there a lot to take in!!!

I've edited http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/St_Leonard%27s_C.E._Church and emailed the following to the vicar:

Hi Mark,

I do hope both you and the church are above water.

I don’t know if you are aware but your church has an entry in Wikipedia, which is a free encyclopedia’ provided for and updated by, everyone across the globe.

The entry has been ‘tagged’ as one requiring updating to bring it within the Wikipedia ‘standard’. I have already made some alterations which I believe will improve the entry. I have to say I am new to editing and am taking advice from a mentor but from my understanding, so far, entries have to be of a factual interest rather than a blatant advert for services; your website, of which a link is legitimate in the circumstances, can do all the ‘promotion’ it wants. At the same time nothing can be taken for granted and therefore has to be informative to persons who may never have heard of certain terms like ‘liturgy’ etc which is why everything has a link to explain terms and places to the uninitiated almost as if they were from another planet.

Unfortunately the username that created the entry in the first place has, it would appear, deleted his or her user name.

Please have a look at the amended entry and feel free to comment. I would love to add a picture of the stained glass window that appears on your ‘Contact Us’ page and perhaps a picture of the church both inside and out.

I await you comments and perhaps pictures. I should mention that any pictures to be included in the entry should be free or copyright so anyone in the world can use them for their own use.

Jmtn13

I'm not sure where you are Sancho but we have had some serious flooding problems in our reagion and maybe in the reagion of the church mentioned above. Check out www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire its serious stuff!!!!

I'll look at Blennerhasset another day.

Thanks for you imput Sancho and await your comments.

Jmrtn13 00:07, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated [4] but having done so I notice it's mostly word for word what appears here [5]. The originator of the article seems to have done a runner; why do they do that? There is a line say it has been included with permission though not who's. I'm still learning the protocol here. Here's me asking after emailing the vicar of St Leonard's! Should I ask Dr. Lionel D. C. Hartley for some kind of formal assent. I could re write it of course; it does seem a worthy story, though I'm not sure about the blatant ad at reference 3 [6]. One problem with me re writing it is that I've been told I 'sound' very English even when chatting online. Would be nice to get some of the pictures added. What do you think? Jmrtn13 23:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Long time no talk

Hi Jmrtn13. Sorry I've been out of touch for a while. I hope you are doing well with the flooding.

I see you started to wikify the article at Red Range, New South Wales. As regards your copyright question, I've e-mailed Lionel Hartley for confirmation of the permission. I based my e-mail on a boiler-plate permission request at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission#Informal (text). If you'd like a copy of what I e-mailed to him, just let me know and I'll e-mail you a copy. Your intuitions are correct about the blatant advertising link at reference 3. It should be removed. Pictures would be very nice for the article. If it turns out that the original author doesn't give release of the material under the GFDL, we'll actually have to delete the article and start from scratch though... so before you put to much effort into the article, lets wait to see what Dr Hartley says in his reply. If he does confirm the release, please, be bold, and clean up the article. It doesn't read much like an encyclopedia article at the moment. Don't worry about "sounding English" either :-) I probably sound like a North American.

That's good that you're being ambitious and contacting people like the Vicar of St. Leonards trying to track down free material. Wikipedia needs more people doing this type of work, especially for images. Like I mentioned above, I like to adapt the boilerplate permission requests that others have used successfully. You can find them at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. I also like the idea of having the person reply with this declaration filled in. That removes any ambiguity about what they are agreeing to release and under what licence they are releasing the material.

I don't know if you noticed, but somebody has proposed that the article at St Leonard's C.E. Church be deleted, due to lack of reliable sources establishing notability. Were you interested in improving this article further? Do you know of any reliable sources that give this subject significant coverage? Sancho 06:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikifying, proposed deletions, and reply from Dr. Hartley

I only made a few more changes before I called the article at Merchant Wind Power wikified. Take a look at the changes I made if you're interested. I just made the first sentence more standard, removed the redundant heading that was the same as the article title, and made a few sections.

I also removed the proposed deletion tag from St Leonard's C.E. Church. Any editor is free to remove a proposed deletion tag if they disagree with the deletion or intend to improve the article as long as they explain so in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Hopefully you can find some reliable sources that establish the notability of this subject. If you need some help, I could try to help you find some.

Lionel Hartley replied with confirmation that he released the text of that website under the GFDL! So, we can continue editing the article as it stands. I'll forward my request and Dr. Hartley's reply to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org. Sancho 06:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello stranger

Personally I survived the floods, many didn’t, even though we were without running water for 2 weeks. I live in Gloucestershire, the heart of the worst. It rained all day, alternating between raining cats and dogs to raining cows and sheep then cars and trucks and back to just cats and dogs from the time I got up until dusk. I was relived when at 4pm the water having held its level at half a brick up my first step for a good hour or so started to get lower. I live no where near a river, it was just the volume of water. The first time I noticed it stopped raining was as it was turning dark. In the morning all the water was gone here. Sorry to bore you but thanks for asking. There should be a page for the flooding. I was just too busy to get out and take pictures. That assumes I could have which seems doubtful!

Your comments are exactly the help I need. Sorry I’ve posted pages of your abandonment, I just found it frustrating making alterations but not knowing if I was doing enough to make pages 'wikified' and what other actions were appropriate. I didn't even know if it was appropriate to email, though I did go ahead and do that in my braver moments so it’s nice to have my intuitions confirmed. Now I feel empowered to do ‘what it takes’!

To me it seems a lot of contributions have merit its even if there seems to be an underlying promotion of some kind. It’s a shame original contributors seem to disappear as it would be good to confer with them to develop their own site. It would seem a shame to delete any page that has merit.

I had noticed the suggested deletion of St Leonard's C.E. Church; again, a page that has merit, and I appealed against its deletion on the discussion page even though there is a ‘blatant’ promotion of services. Again the original contributor no longer seems to be a ‘user’.

I hope you will feel free to comment on my amendments. I won’t always get things right bit I will get there!

Red Range, New South Wales

I've noticed;

The permission for use of this work has been archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system (Lionel Hartley of [1]). Please contact a person with an account on the system to confirm the permission.

on the discussion page but how do I translate that into something meaningful? We've got clear skies now and we don't know how to cope. lol

Oh, I put that there... it's kind of cryptic, I know. But it means something to any people looking for copyright violations. Go ahead and work on the article. I would suggest working on finding references for a lot of the material. Try using the Wikipedia:Citation templates inside the <ref></ref> tags. {{cite web}} is the most common one you will use probably. Sancho 23:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations and linking

I saw you used those citation templates over at Mediation in Australia. Looks much nicer :-) Any questions about those? It seems you have the hang of them now. Another suggested read is this: WP:OVERLINK. Sancho 16:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wikification

Hi,

Thanks for all the wikilinking at Jain rituals and festivals. In general, you can consider a page sufficiently wikified to remove the tag if it has

An intro section, with the article's name in bold the first time it appears, and some general information about the subject
Internal links
Sections, with the right levels of headers (unless it is a stub too short to need sections)

If it is only missing one of these, you can change the {{wikify}} to {{intromissing}}, {{deadend}}, or {{sections}}.

Happy editing! --Alynna 14:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation in Australia

Hi Jmrtn13. Hope things are going well. I got distracted last week by some administrator tasks and real life so I didn't get to answer your question about the Mediation in Australia article. The basic Wikification looks pretty good... a little overlinked still though. You should also check to make sure that the links point to the article you had in mind. For example, you wikilinked parties, but I don't think you were talking about parties that have cake :-) There are sections, and a start towards a good lead section. I don't know enough about the topic to suggest directions for expansion of the article, but I have a few suggestions for improvement of the current content:

A more captivating and telling Wikipedia:Lead section would help.
Avoid the use of vague terms like "often", "many", etc.
It reads a lot like a "how-to", with advice about how mediation should happen, or what the mediator should do. This detracts from an encyclopedic tone.

I'll take a little bit longer to think about what to do about the material that has been commented out. Also, these absences of mine will probably continue over the next while. I'm happy to continue to be a mentor, but if you feel that you need a bit more guidance than I've been giving you, I'd also be happy to help you find another. Talk to you soon. Sancho 06:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of St Leonard's C.E. Church

An article that you have been involved in editing, St Leonard's C.E. Church, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St Leonard's C.E. Church. Thank you. --B. Wolterding 18:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Allhallows Parish Church.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:38, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]