User talk:Peter Skuce

Use preview

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Adambro (talk) 21:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced content

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Adambro (talk) 21:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Class 158

Hello - I have posted 1 question, and 1 suggestion on the talk page of "BR Class 158". I would be interested if you can help with either.Carrolljon (talk) 11:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

DPTAC, Class 158

But what is "DPTAC", "EAO" etc..and how are new buttons relevant - as I recall the 158's already had tactile buttons... Is the new feature that they have braille. Is it just a new button or is there some feature that makes them truly interesting?

While I'm here can I point out that features such as "Repainted dado side panels and wall ends" probably aren't sufficiently notable for inclusion. In the context of a machine 20years old I think you can appreciate that being concise would be an advantage. Sorry to bring this up.

Also I'd be interested in your views on rearranging the operations history... My current idea is to split into regional workings eg transpennine, south west etc. And then treat each section separately in chronological order??Carrolljon (talk) 12:13, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

DPTAC is Disabled Persons Advisory Committee.

The reason why I inserted "Repainted dado side panels and wall ends", is because I like to list all or most of the refurbishment work added.

Peter Skuce

more

Thanks for your response.

I've taken the liberty of rewriting the information you provided (specifically removing the bullet points and converting to sentence form). I found a reference for part of the info. Unfortunately some of the information I didn't include (though the CCTV information should be easy to reference I haven't re-added as yet)

There are two problems here - the first one is verifyability - basically any information provide has to have (or be capable of having) a third party source - this can be something on the web/internet, or a rail publication, or a book on the subject etc. (please see Wikipedia:Verifiability if you haven't already seen it.)

The second issue is one of notability (again there are some guidlines on this see Wikipedia:Notability) - clearly this can be quite subjective... I too like to have as much information as possible on a subject.

One of the issues is the articles length, but an equally important one is getting balance in the article (note that it's a good idea to list "further reading" sources at the bottom of the page for those that want to know more.) I think it's problematic having a wealth of infomation on current or recent operations when the article covers past operations (eg BR regional) so scetchily (sp.) In this case the emphasis on the current interior design etc would really require an equal emphasis on the original interior furnishings etc - I hope that makes sense.

Another possible problem is the wikipedia policy of "no original research" (which I know from experience can be a pain) (see Wikipedia:No original research) - basically even if something may seem obvious - a fact still requires a published third party reference.

Sorry about that long explanation.

Images

I'm not sure about this but I think Help:Images and other uploaded files should be useful to you. If you go to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and select upload file on the left panel and then follow the instructions from there.. If you get stuck try the help desk as I'm not an expert on this - I think the most important thing is to put the images in suitable catagories - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:British_Rail_Class_158 would probably be right in this example. Once the image has been uploaded to there it can be used anywhere on wikipedia. You might want to check the license agreements since many include a loss of copyright of your images (I don't know specifically which ones..)

I don't know about the 4 days thing - again http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Help_desk or http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Help:Contents are good places to ask this sort of thing.

email

As far as I know I can be contacted by email via my user page - via the toobox on the left hand side - personally I prefer using the talk pages on the articles - as its easier to keep track of for me.

dmu units info

The best way to add info is add it to the article or suggest it for inclusion on the relevent talk page. In particular all the BR DMU articles really need more info from the past - specifically operations under BR, if you have any. That aside images than the very common exterior view could be useful - we already have a lot of images of different liverys etc, but none of the bogies, underfloor equipment etc.

By the way re:"richmond navigator seats" - to the non - expert (including me) this is confusion - is richmond a company.. or a seat model name.?? This is the reason why references are so important - including those to the companies that supply the equipment. I did some searching and found that Richmond is "Richmond ergonomic developments Ltd." - this is the sort of thing that really needs to be linked to - if there is an article on wikipedia then a link to that is usually good - if not then a note in the references with a link to the company is a good idea. (I can show you a good way to do those links if you need help with that.) I think similar issues apply to the names of patterns used etc.

Hope some of that helps and I'm looking forward to those images.Carrolljon (talk) 16:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Class 158

Update: I'm currently working towards a rewrite of part of the class 158 article - in an atttempt to make it more readable - as part of that I'll try to incorporate the rest of the information you provided in the manner I have attempted to describe.

When I've done that I'll leave you a message for your feedback - hopefully you will like the results. This could take a few days..Carrolljon (talk) 18:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Class 158 photographs

Hello. I'm not sure I can see your photographs yet. Which ones am I looking for? Do they have a common title? (There might be some lag or something between uploading?)

Have you got a working link to them?

Don't worry about replacing other images with yours (if they are better quality of course!). The general policy is against using gallerys - but if you have an 'astounding image' I see no reason not to put it in, maybe at the end.. Also please bear in mind different people have different screen resolutions - and different internet speeds - thats one reasons to avoid using big, or too many images - they can always click on the image if they want to see it bigger anyway. I usually just use the code

[[File:Imagename.jpg|thumb|right|desription of the image]]

which simplifies things a lot, you can substitute "right" for "left" - sometimes this can dramatically alter the flow of text and improve readablility. Adding something like 150px eg

[[File:Imagename.jpg|thumb|right|150px|desription of the image]]

makes the image be 150pixels. 300 is quite a big image - most people seem to use 300 for the picture in the info box. Also if you use thumb - it lets people choose the size of the image they see ie see http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Preferences in the section "files" you can select the image size. This is useful for those who have big and small screens. (preferences is next to "my talk" at the top of the page, on the same line as login/logout). Good luck.Carrolljon (talk) 21:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Still can't find those photographs - not the train numbers you mention - have you got a hyperlink? Are they definately in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:British_Rail_Class_158 ?

Carrolljon (talk) 22:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello again. I can see those photographs - but when I click on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:British_Rail_Class_158 I can't find them - strange - I count 193 on that page. Can you see your photographs appearing in that category?

The photographs seem fine - and don't forget that there is already a link to the commons category on the class 158 page (it's at the bottom near the references).

You probably know your photographs better than I do - all I can suggest is that you add (space permiiting) any liveries not covered in the article, and replace any poor images in the article with better ones if you have them.

One suggestion I could make is that there should be and old interior and a new interior photograph in the article - the article already has an interior shot - and it looks to me like an old one.

I'll leave it up to you. I think you've got better shots of the alphaline livery than the one used currently - some of the images in the articles are at a shallow angle and have issues with reflection.Carrolljon (talk) 00:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Class 158 refurb

Question: Do you know if it was "Railcare wolverton" that carried out the refurbishments, or perhaps the same place under Alstom owwnership? If so that would simplify finding evidence for the reference section.Carrolljon (talk) 21:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello again - I asked because I found reports Central trains having their 158s refurbished at wolverton :http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/Press/release.aspx?Id=61, they also did work on Scotrail 158s too http://www.railcare-uk.com/files/downloads/Class%20158%20Express.pdf

Another firm doing work on 158s is DeltaRail (east midlands)

I can't find anything as yet on the FGW work. Its possible that www.thejunction.org.uk might have more details but I haven't spotted anything.Carrolljon (talk) 01:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

EMUs

I'm not currently working on EMU's at the moment.

Re: photographs as evidence - I don't know - for an answer ask on the help desk Wikipedia:Help desk [1]]

If you add or suggest information on articles can you please provide a reference - it saves other people having to go looking for it. You mention that the details of the FGW refurb are at the railway centre - I don't have any intention of going looking for it for you - you know where it is so why don't you provide the reference.

Also I am not here to 'type' information for you. Carrolljon (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

re EMUS

Yes anyone can edit the articles - however it helps the other editors a lot if you provide the references for the info you have.Carrolljon (talk) 23:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

DMUs

Thank you for supplying an image of the interior of the British Rail Class 180 - I have added it to that article and think it is a particularily useful illustrative image. Keep up the good work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.43.12 (talk) 03:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Class 319 Future Plans

Hi, I noticed that in your recent additions to this section of British Rail Class 319, you have added that the Class 319s will 'operate between Newport, Cardiff and Swansea, permitting exisiting DMU trains to be cascaded onto Cardiff Valley Lines routes'. I was just wondering what your source for this is? It infers in the Rail Electrification plans that some of the 319s will be transferred to operate between Liverpool and Manchester, however it doesn't say that they will also replace the Class 323s which currently operate out of Manchester. I'm just basically wondering if these pieces of information are based on speculation, or if there's any truth behind them. Regards, Raywil (talk) 17:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Raywil,

in Rail (magazine), it states that the Class 319 EMUs will move to First Great Western to replace most of the Classes 165 and 166 Turbo DMUs. Also the Class 319 will replace DMUs working Manchester - Rainhill - Liverpool services and replace the Class 323 EMU, which will move south to the West Midlands area to boost the existing fleet of Class 323 working both the Cross City line and the Coventry - Wolverhampton service.

This information has also come from DfT.

Finally, please feel free to use more of my photographs of the Class 319 interiors.

Kind regards,

--Peter Skuce (talk) 00:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Great, I was just wondering if you could add a reference to that particular issue since at the moment as I read it, without a reference it seems slightly dubious. It will also avoid other users asking for your source again in the future. (See WP:V, WP:RS, & WP:CS) Also, the article currently says 'to operate between Newport, Cardiff and Swansea' and 'to operate all suburban services between Oxford, Newbury, Reading and London'. Perhaps you could also find a source for these phrases because as I understand it, these lines are not being electrified, so the information that the Class 319 EMUs will be working on these lines seems quite doubtful as a result. It would probably also be worth mentioning in the article that they will replace 165s and 166s on the GWML as you say above, and citing the particular issue of Rail. Regards, Raywil (talk) 05:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Well I can defintely state that those lines WILL be electrified as part of the Great Western Main Line Electrification (London - Bristol - Newport - Cardiff - Swansea) as annonced by the Government in July. The government also stated that the Liverpool - Manchester route would also be electrified on the same day. Reference Rail issue No. 623 or 624 (around there).

Would it be possible to find for me where it says that Oxford - Newbury - Reading - London will be electrified? I'm just interested in finding out about this and there is no mention of it in the electrification plan. Regards, Raywil (talk) 17:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The information you request/require is in public domain - Department for Transport website, Rail (magazine), Todays Railways UK etc...

BTW to correct you regarding the routes, the routing are as follows:

• Newbury/Oxford - Reading - Slough - London Paddington will the Thames Valley local EMU service
• Swansea - Cardiff - Newport - Bristol Parkway - Swindon - Didcot Parkway - Reading - Slough - London Paddington will be the Super InterCity Express service
• Bristol Temple Meads - Swindon - Didcot Parkway - Reading - Slough - London Paddington will also be the Super InterCity Express service

I hope that this helps you with the information you require.

Kind regards

--Peter Skuce (talk) 18:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

It's helpful information, but I can't find that on the DfT website. Mind to give a link? Regards, Raywil (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Images and galleries

Hi. When editing articles, galleries are generally discouraged unless the information they convey cannot be shown easily by inline photos. Galleries show very small thumbnails (generally around 100px, compared to 300px for standard images), an so are not always that useful. Maybe you could create the galleries at Commons:British Rail Class 313 or something? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the message. I can confirm that I have done this with the Class 313. With regards to the Class 313, I have featured silverlink and FCC samples, as I am not keen on the London Overground samples, due to the logos on the sides look terrible. For your information, I have installed galleries on the following pages:

• Class 315
• Class 317
• Class 319
• Class 321

and I am about to install a gallery on the Class 365 page, which will include Network SouthEast, First Capital Connect and advertising liveries.

Finally I will be visiting Hornsey Train Maintenance Depot on Wednesday 23RD September to take photographs of the First Capital Connect refreshed Class 321.

I hope that all of the above is helpful and interesting to you.

Thanks again for the message!

--Peter Skuce (talk) 11:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand me. I'm saying STOP adding galleries. All that you've added could be done better with inline images from what I've seen. While I applaud your fervor, the method is lacking.

By the way - Hornsey TMD - in or out? -mattbuck (Talk) 00:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Will be visiting INSIDE Hornsey TMD and getting photographs of their refreshed Class 321. This will then mean that I will have an extensive collection of photographs of all of their trains. Is there anything you want me to find out for you while I am there next Wednesday?

Why stop adding/installing galleries? I thought that this is a good/excellent way to feature more than three photographs on a webpage.

Also there are different liveries and refurbishments. I'm sorry to inform you that I do not plan on stopping yet, unless you can calmly explain what I am doing is incorrect. I am not trying to cause trouble or bother anyone, I just want information and photographs updated. I hope that this explains why I have been busy beavering away at this work, which I consider to be important.

--Peter Skuce (talk) 08:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Wish I could get inside Hornsey - I got some photos from outside there a few months back.

As for galleries, a collection of images is something Wikipedia is not. We have Wikimedia Commons for creating vast galleries, as well as collecting the images to begin with. While I understand why you want to add all these images, I don't think that people coming to the page need to see every livery and every interior styling in order to understand the subject. It's just unnecessary.

If you really wish to have this information, the best options are to create a gallery on Commons, or find a way to work it in to the article through text and inline images, the latter being preferable. Create text sections about the refurbishments, and add the images there. I'm not arguing that there isn't a use for the information, just that a gallery is stylistically bad.

I hope this helps you understand. For further examples, see Ffestiniog Railway, and the gallery created for it, Commons:Ffestiniog Railway Virtual Ride. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this - I will use the inline version that you mention from now on, however I do feel that there is a need and reasons for using galleries from time to time, especially if there is a large amount of images (i.e. more than three or six). I hope that I did not cause any offence with my previous message.

--Peter Skuce (talk) 10:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

It's ok, I understand. How do you get inside Hornsey anyway? Oh, and if you need more pictures, you can upload some of my flickr ones to Commons using flickr2commons. Just give me a list of any you do this with. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:16, 15

September 2009 (UTC)

I've been in contact with the Engineering Director, Mr. Andy Cope (now retired) and Customer Relations Executive Julie Allan. I also used to communicate with Elaine Holt, the MD! Am on good terms with Hornsey TMD Manager, Mr. Ian Duncan and it was he who invited me back to Hornsey, last Friday during the 'Meet The Directors' online forum. Is there anything you wish to find out with regards to Classes 313, 317, 321 and 365? So that you know, most of the Class 377/5 Electrostars have now received the full First Capital Connect livery and branding.

--Peter Skuce (talk) 13:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

South Western Turbo

Why are you reverting this when I have shown references. If you can find your own references to back up your Wessex Turbo claims then please include them, but as multiple official sources (including minutes of meetings with BR) show South Western Turbo, it will be changed back. --Enotayokel (talk) 08:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

British Rail Class 350

You removed a section about some British Rail Class 350 unit being operated on the Manchester to Liverpool line once it has been electrified. This statement was sourced. You didn't explain why you removed this section and so I have re-instated it.

In future, please use the Edit Summary or make a note on the talk page when removing sourced material. NRTurner (talk) 12:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry for this. There is a possiblity that twenty six Class 319/3 Thameslink EMUs could be transferred from First Capital Connect to Northern Rail (First Great Western would receive all sixty original build Class 319/0, 319/2 and 319/4 Thameslink EMUs for their London and Thames Valley services - they currently have fifty eight Turbo DMUs at present on these services).

I am not sure if London Euston - Northampton/Birmingham passengers would be happy if their trains were moved away from the services they currently work.

I'll upload some improved quality photographs of the Siemens Class 350 Desiro EMU later on today - I hope that this will make up for it.

Thanks and I'm sorry about that.

--Peter Skuce (talk) 17:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Image galleries again

Hi Peter,

I appreciate the effort that you've gone to to obtain all the photos you've been posting recently. However, you don't seem to have taken heed of the request that was made a couple of weeks ago: please stop adding image galleries to articles! (For instance, as nice as Wrexham & Shropshire#Refurbishment gallery looks, it does take up rather a lot of space, and is in contravention of a long-standing Wikipedia policy: see Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files, especially part 4. (If you keep ignoring this policy, people will get upset.) --RFBailey (talk) 18:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining the reason in detail and for your understanding. I did the refurbishment gallery for Wrexham and Shropshire because it was newsworthy and give as much information out as possible. Does Wikipedia prefer to use single images to the side?

Why is there the option to provide galleries on Wikipedia pages in the first place if Wikipedia is against it - it is controdicting itself here and thus therefore this is very confusing.

Thanks again.

Kind regards,

--Peter Skuce (talk) 20:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The reason that the <gallery></gallery> function exists is that it is a standard part of the MediaWiki software that Wikipedia runs on. Various other places also use it, such as Wikimedia Commons. A consequence of the policy I pointed to means that people shouldn't use them excessively in on articles. However, on Wikimedia Commons, for instance, it is a perfectly acceptable, and useful, feature.

If you would like to make your photographs available to the world to see and make use of, then I recommend that you create yourself an account at Wikimedia Commons (go here to do that) and upload them there instead. Then they will be available for use on Wikipedia articles in all languages (not just English). They are very good, and given that you have access to places like Hornsey TMD which most of us don't (standing on Hornsey station is as close as I have managed!), then they will be very useful.

As for "I did the refurbishment gallery for Wrexham and Shropshire because it was newsworthy and give as much information out as possible", you will find that most experienced Wikipedia editors will tell you that giving out "as much information as possible" can be a bit over-the-top. Showing a couple of pictures of a refurbished train is quite enough to demonstrate what you are trying to show. "Single images to the side" are what is preferred.

Also, another part of What Wikipedia is not is what is referred to in shorthand as WP:NOTNEWS; content has to be able to withstand the test of time, in that it should still be notable in a year's time or more. Essentially, we're an encyclopaedia, not an online newspaper.

I hope this answers your questions! --RFBailey (talk) 22:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Further to the comments by NRTurner above, I would strongly urge you provide edit summaries. Any information you provide will make it a lot easier for other users. Not only should they be able to gain a basic understanding of the change without reviewing the diff, there is also the opportunity for you to use the edit summary to provide a brief explanation of why you made a particular change. Regards. Adambro (talk) 12:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Cl.321 reference

I'll post this on the article talk page too, but just so you know, there's a very reliable source confirming the information you've added. If you have time (I'm really busy at the moment), could you add [2] to the page as a reference, thanks. Nick (talk) 17:04, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Picture captions

This edit [3] (to give just one example) is contrary to Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Captions that don't comprise a complete sentence should not have a full stop. –Signalhead ^< T > 19:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced content

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to British Rail Class 395. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.

Using the edit summaries would also be helpful to other editors. Edgepedia (talk) 08:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

With regards to the British Rail Class 395, I am under the impression that the trains normally run at 140mph and not at 125mph as you claim. Please provide a source which substantiates your claims. NRTurner (talk) 13:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments on my talk page. However on Wikipedia Verifiability and and reliable sources are more important than truth. I've found the best way to approach this is to find reliable sources and then summerize these with a neutral point of view (NPOV). Edgepedia (talk) 13:19, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

British Rail Class 153

Your input would be welcome here. Regards. Adambro (talk) 15:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

South Western Turbo

Am still going to have to disagree with you - Western Turbo was considered but dropped for Western Region connotations, BR certainly called them South Western Turbo as that was what was painted on the side, it was a modification of the West Of England 3 lions Logo carried by the locomotive stock, commuting from Exeter Central - I saw a lot of 159s!

It sounds like SWT are at odds with BR, esp as BR considered Wessex to be the Weymouth line with the Wessex Logo featuring a knight...

Hansard says http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm100209/text/100209w0009.htm Dr. Murrison: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what plans he has to replace the (a) Class 158 Express Sprinter and (b) Class 159 South Western Turbo rolling stock operating between London and Exeter via Salisbury; what timetable he has set for replacement of that rolling stock; and if he will make a statement. [316083]

Chris Mole: The Department for Transport has no plans to replace the Class 158 Express Sprinter and the Class 159 South Western Turbo rolling stock operating between London and Exeter.

--Enotayokel (talk) 20:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Yet I have seen Class 159 in Network SouthEast livery displaying 'Wessex Turbo' branding around 1997-1999, I can't be lying. I have also wrote on your talk page. --Peter Skuce (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

It was South Western - as in London and South Western Railway, as the Western Region of BR had been the ones who ran the route down in the 60s/70s it was felt a more 'Southern' title was appropriate. Is a pity I never got a photo of the big sign outside Salisbury depot (was there until 2002ish when SWT put their own signs up) proclaiming (in NSE Colours and with this artist's impression 'HOME OF THE SOUTH WESTERN TURBOS' (presumably from the Depot's Construction) --Enotayokel (talk) 21:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

And checking the Rail Magazine issue referenced, it shows the branding there - South Western Turbo it is... --Enotayokel (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Your 'minor' edits

I notice that you have made quite a lot of minor edits on the page British Rail Class 365. Regarding this, you might want to read this section on WP:MINOR. Regards User:Osarius (I cannot log in for some reason at the moment, so am using my anonymous account) 87.112.0.83 (talk) 23:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC) (Just managed to sign in, please reply on my talk page. Osarius : Talk : Contribs 23:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC))

April 2010

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to British Rail Class 350, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Please DO NOT remove or change parts of an article without giving a reason! Osarius : Talk : Contribs 22:59, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Redrose64 (talk) 11:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Class 313 Images

There's a talk page thread concerning your removal of the FCC image which would benifit from your input: Talk:British Rail Class 313#New image dispute. Alzarian16 (talk) 14:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

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) 14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

August 2021

Hi Peter Skuce! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. David Biddulph (talk) 08:32, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Rail image captions

Hi Peter Skuce,

I noticed that you altered a lot of image captions to do with UK rail vehicles in the last few days, adding details such as unit/set numbers. I'm querying whether such detail is really necessary in the caption? As described by the Manual Of Style, captions are generally used as a very simple way of quickly describing an image, such as "A Class 100 in London Kings Cross", ie without superfluous words. If the reader wants more details about the photograph, they can always navigate to the picture itself and view the full caption left by the author of the image. I don't wish to take part in any sort of edit war, so would like to hear your opinions on the matter first. Danners430 (talk) 17:08, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)