User talk:Keith D/Archive 31

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Keith D. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 25

←

Archive 29

→

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2012

Delivered February 2012 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 10:21, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Flags Institues

It is a pressure group with no official status which cannot help pick the official flags as they do not determine what is an what is not an official flags. The conditions of inclusion into the Institutes UK Flag Registry is "In the case of county flags, the flag must normally apply to a historical county rather than a modern administrative area", effectively excluding the Metropolitan Counties. The Registry includes several flags for counties which no longer exists, which where nominated after they ceased to exist and nominated by unofficial organisations.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 15:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The template is for accessing the appropriate flags and is no way propaganda in itself. I have declined your request as it is a simple way of accessing the information rather than hard-coding the links. Keith D (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

It's not accessing the appropriate flag as the source used is a bias, non authoritative propaganda merchant.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 22:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

You have declined it with an explanation that makes non sense. I sugest you give up what ever privilege allows you to make such decisions and get someone else to decline it.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 23:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Please stop being disruptive by re-adding the tag to the template. Keith D (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you answer the direct points that have been put, explain who you are granting authority to this propaganda machine, who you are failing to answer points raised. It you who should stop allowing Wikipedia to be manipulated by various pressure groups.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 23:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

You also forgot to mention you have edited before you are not exactly disinterested. --Kitchen Knife (talk) 23:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The template is a method of getting to the appropriate flag entries on the flag institutes website and it is not a case for speedy deletion as it is not propaganda just a method of accessing it. If you think otherwise then go to WP:TFD. The organisation and their views are not in question in the template. I think I have edited it previously when it was displaying the incorrect flags when clicking on links. Keith D (talk) 12:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Simon Burns

This is what IP was talking about. I wonder if IP is stupid or dishonest. -Rrius (talk) 13:23, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, the info did not really make sense and even with the reference still is not clear what the IP was trying to say. May be something on the NHS talks needs to go in at some point. Keith D (talk) 13:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Nationality

Why aren't people's Nationality "British" England is not an independant recognised state, the United Kingdom of Great Britain is! The correct way might be "xxxxx..is a British Mountaineer from England" or " xxxx is a British / English Mountaineer.." Nationality is generally recognised as what constitutes an independent country not a region, state or province within that internationaly recognised nation state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.98.204.219 (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

The tendency is to use the appropriate country rather than the nationality for UK people. For example footballers will be down as English, Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish rather than British though they are also British. Thus with categories we move down to the country cats rather than load them all in the British cat. Keith D (talk) 23:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Wait for the joke to die down?

Doncaster did not sign a pact with England, as mentioned in those two reputable press sources I provided amongst many others. Therefore it is not vandalism, it is the truth that Doncaster is still officially part of Scotland. There is no British consitution, and many of the pacts and treaties that hold these 4 nations together go back 900 years also, so this is actually relevant, and this is no joke. A wikipedia member disallowing encyclopedic truth to be reported puts you into a very bad light. The truth of the matter is that it is Scottish, and it CAN NOT BE DISPUTED - BECAUSE THE PACT WITH ENGLAND WAS NEVER SIGNED!!!! Jackandvictor (talk) 14:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Administrator noticeboard

Check this out-Ravi _{My Tea Kadai} 18:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for notification. Keith D (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - March 2012

Delivered March 2012 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 08:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Infobox for RAF Elvington

Hi Keith, Thanks for the newsletter. Please do you know of an Infobox template suitable for the RAF Elvington article? I would usually use Template:Infobox UK property but it's at WP:TfD at the moment. Thanks --Harkey (talk) 13:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice to see the newsletter without prodding the paper lad! One user is trying to get rid of loads of infoboxes at the moment and suggesting using the generic ones which do not always fit. Best one I can see is {{Infobox military structure}}, many of the RAF ones seem to have infoboxes made up of wikitables rather than use a template. Keith D (talk) 15:21, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

LostAlone

I have noticed you are an active editor in LostAlone article, unfortunately I know almost nothing of it, but, I have noticed someone has created I'm_a_UFO_in_This_City page and I feel they tried to redirect this article to LostAlone, but could not format correctly. If you think that article should be redirected to LostAlone, please correct the formatting. Thanks. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 19:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Cannot say I know anything about the subject. I have performed the requested history merge on the articles and left without redirect at the moment, will leave for regular editors of article to decide on redirect or not. Keith D (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Alright! Thanks! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:39, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

And thanks for editing the article! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Historic Coventry edit-a-thon at Herbert Art Gallery and Museum, Coventry

Historic Coventry Edit-a-thon - You are invited!

The Herbert Art Gallery and Museum is hosting an edit-a-thon on Saturday 31 March 2012. 15 Wikimedians will have to learn more about "historic Coventry". The day will centre upon editing, however and we aim to improve the coverage of Coventry's illustrious history on Wikimedia projects. For more information and to sign up, see the event page. We hope you'll join us! Rock drum _Ba-dum^Crash 17:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Yorkshire Dales map

Hey,

I've just created/uploaded the relief map to right of the Yorkshire Dales (as a complement to the existing location map), I'd appreciate any thoughts you have about it - given your feedback was helpful for the location map version.

I'm concerned that the National Park boundary is not readily apparent, especially compared to the plainer map where its blatantly obvious. I suppose adding a boundary line is the way to improve that, do you have any suggestions as to what would "look right"?--Nilf anion (talk) 21:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks good apart from the boarder as you say. It needs some outline to indicate the boundary, possibly something that is not already on the map such as red. Just noticed that the county lines on the insert are not really visible and could do with making clearer, same problem on existing county maps but the red mark makes things clearer than the green used here. Keith D (talk) 21:42, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for feedback, I'll have a play and let you know when its done. I might want to revisit the inserts as a whole (they use the regions not counties), but I'm not too worried about boundaries on the insert as long as they are visible at full res, and the highlighted area is in a thumbnail.--Nilf anion (talk) 12:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

OK added a dashed red line (same thickness as the county border) (compare to 221px thumb). I think that's probably enough to suffice? It is background info after all.--Nilf anion (talk) 19:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks OK to me, thanks for the changes. Keith D (talk) 19:47, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)It looks good but the new red lines are not showing on my browser except at full resolution. Is this a software problem? I encountered a similar fault when trying to update the Fountains Abbey plan on Wikimedia Commons--Harkey (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about the edit conflict!!Harkey (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Could your problem be related to WP:VPT#Weird thumbnail errors? Keith D (talk) 19:54, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Fountains plan on commons

Hi again Keith, The plan I uploaded to commons is here. I was going to replace the map and table in the Fountains Abbey article with this new plan which is already labelled, but I can't get it to show on the page. I must admit that after trying on a couple of computers, clearing the cache and trying different browsers I threw in the towel!! Am I doing, or have I done, something daft? --Harkey (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I think it is something daft. There is a file of that name on wikipedia and that is being displayed in preference to the one on commons with the same name. Keith D (talk) 21:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops!! Erm, right. Whats to do, Yogi?--Harkey (talk) 21:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Probably best to rename the new commons image. See Commons:Commons:FAQ#How_can_I_rename.2Fmove_an_image_or_other_media_file.3F. May be the file move is more restricted on Commons. Keith D (talk) 21:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Yogi !!left|20px--Harkey (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

It's working fine now.--Harkey (talk) 23:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Lancelot "Capability" Brown

dmy. Thanks for catching that. Sometimes I forget where I am editing in a given moment. Obviously, that was the right format for that article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Woldgate College

Hey, was the content i publish to personal, as i feel it may have been embelished but none of it untrue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WoW.Athenei5DA-BomB (talk • contribs) 18:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

All of the detail was written as a personal reflection and not as an encyclopaedic entry, see WP:TONE. The information was also unsupported by any references so is totally unverifiable. All material should be supported by reliable sources and be to Third-party sources. Keith D (talk) 18:53, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

RAF Warwick

Hello Keith D

Thank you for formatting the article which i had recently created, i will change my template and other articles (which i have created) which have the same problems.

What is the difference between

References and Reflist ?

Gavbadger (talk) 19:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

{{reflist}} is formatted at about 90% text size and has various other parameters that can adjust the layout, i.e. number of columns etc.. <references/> is the basic reference output method, which there was talk of switching to the 90% text size. Either can be used. Keith D (talk) 19:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Info lost in Megalith template change

The information is not lost, and clicking on the coordinate link displays the GeoHack tool which lists the coordinates using different systems, including the UK and Irish Ordnance Survey coordinates. Neither of the suggested replacement templates contains fields for the UK-only or Ireland-only geo-coordinate systems. If it is important for these to be included in either of the suggested replacement templates, then editors may suggest on those templates' talk pages, or (as do several of the aritcles) list that information within the body of the articles. I have left comments on each of the pages noting the original OS grid coordinates to make it easier for editors to reinsert them should they wish. • Astynax ^talk 02:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

RAF Snitterfield

Hello Keith D

Thank you spotting the error on the RAF Snitterfield article.

My question is regarding my intrepretation of the accidents and incidents section of the RAF Snitterfield article

Do you think the way i have put the accidents in as single sentences or would another way be better? Also would any bullet pointing help?.

Thanks Gavbadger (talk) 18:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. Bulleting would help to show it is a list and better than just having single sentences. You could try a table to see if that works any better. It could also do with some links to explain the abbreviations, OTU, PAFU etc. Keith D (talk) 18:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

RAF Bitteswell

Hi Keith D

Would it be possible if you could have a quick look through my sandbox "http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Gavbadger/sandbox" and check the article. I am currently making an article called RAF Bitteswell and any comments you have would be extremely helpful before i publish the article outside of my sandbox?

Thank you in advance

p.s The runway information is currently incorrect but i will correct it before i publish it.

Gavbadger (talk) 22:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, I have had a look and done a few small tweaks. Looking over it the following problems would need looking at.

"1 B1 and 2 T2's" needs some explanation - what is a B1 and T2?
The section "Based units" is a problem as most of the sentences start with a numeric. You should avoid starting sentences with a numeric and try recasting or spell out the number.
The references need some more detail such as publisher, publish date, access date etc. to reduce link rot as the more information there is the easier to locate replacement links.

By the way I had no idea that Magna Park was an airfield at some time in the past and I drove by it earlier today! Keith D (talk) 23:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments and i will work on making it better.

I know how you feel, when i started to look for the airfield using an online map i thought it was a tiny relief landing ground south west of the actual village because there was a small number of hangars there, i had no idea it was that big and important with post war aircraft development.

Gavbadger (talk) 23:34, 29 March 2012 (UTC)