Jump to content

User talk:Pit-yacker/Archive1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

Hello Pit-yacker/Archive1! welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for contributing. Here are a some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement.
Best of luck. Have fun! --ElectricEye
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical


Arthur fforde / Aurthur Fforde

Hi Pit-yacker, User:Miami Vice sent me a message explaining that traditionally surnames starting with ff should not be capitalized because ff is the same as capital F. According to him that was the tradition "back in the day". I'm not sure of the Wikipedia policy on this so I'm not going to do anything about it. Perhaps you can contact this user and get some clarification since he is the original author of the Arthur fforde article and has expressed concern about the capitalization.[1] Thank you. --ElectricEye (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted the article back and contacted Miami Vice about this. Not sure on Wikipedia policy either (if there is one). However, my own opinion is that it should be at the correct spelling. I have also left a note on the talk page, so hopefully no one else will incorrectly move it.
Pit-yacker 23:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, the relevant articles would appear to be Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) and Wikipedia:Naming_conventions. Giving a quick scan, neither seem to give any consideration to this case. Naming conventions does however, state that what the article states are conventions and not hard rules. In which case, IMHO, we should err on the side of correctness. Pit-yacker 23:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Pit-yacker

Sorry to have been so split-hairingly specific about all this surname business but thank you for amending the article. It's not really an issue that my ancestor would turn in his grave for, but I appreciate it.

Nic

BBC World Service

You are not here to defend the BBC. This is not a Political forum, If you are a varnish man for the BBC then wikipedia is not the place for you- The BBC is a fully funded organization of the British Government - Ministers have justified funding for the BBC because it projects the British point of view and British Foreign policy. Do you think the British government funds the BBC for Charitable reasons? If you think so you must be daft. The article is factual – If you have any disagreements be more specific, so that we may understand your logic of using the revert button to destroy a good article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.35.181 (talk • contribs) 2006-10-19 Dear Mr Yakker

You have destroyed the hard work over months by contributors to this page by your arbitarary reverts I know the revert button gives a sense of power Please control your urge to vandalise You were invited to fully explain your reverts this u have not done we can now only assume you are just a little vandal

regards

Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.35.181 (talk • contribs) 2006-10-20


You took a warning off wikipedia; & therefore, prevented me from using the only form of communication with the world outside of Europe, that i have. The lunatics at the University of Manchester; & BBC, Oxford Road; have the area on virtual lock-down. Under the laws of the United Kingdom, you are guilty of a breech, under the 1875; crimes against the individual act. As i have stated; you people are making it virtually impossible to live in this country; unless you are pro terror. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.17.255 (talk • contribs) 2007-07-14

Hmmm. Yes right. I assume you refer to the edits to BBC News by User:86.158.86.101 that I reverted [2]? The University of Manchester struggle to keep their buildings locked never mind anything else. The average student is so politically motivated that UMSU managing a quorate (IIRC 300 out of 24,000 students) meeting is front-page news. I would get your doctor to check your medication. Pit-yacker 18:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Your problem; as a group, is not a political point of view, for you don't have one, you are all things to all people but the lawfull; you are completely committed; "Direct Action Anarchists">>>"Solfed">>>"Respect" >>> Pro terror >>> G Galloway; & you all know it. You all have MSbP; cause a problem in society, in order to use Horst Rittel's [IBIS], {Berlin-Circa 1930}, in order to solve said, "Wicked Problem"; that you & your cult have caused. The answer; like with the Nazi's; & their death cult, is take a scalple & "cult-cut" the problem out of society [Gas Chambers]. If thinking that, a countries society, being orrientated around a mother-wheel, "Euro Death Cult" isn't such a good idea, makes me insane, well what can i say. Please don't wait for your "G-3" to give you orders; before calling me insane again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.17.255 (talk • contribs) 2007-07-14

On cold reflection; i would have to say that most of the problems in; & around the inner city areas, have spawned from the hard line National Socialist faithful of the old "Wilson" days; & their families & friends. This almost caused a military coup in 1975. I have simply no reason to, want for bloodshed; for i have kept my hands off my fathers throat, for the 18 years that i have been able of killing him, for perpetual crimes against my individual librties; including; theft & smear campaigns. I don't commit acts of violence because i am not of the Group Deluded Dynamic; & a society, as a whole, that uses that fact, in order to gain a solicitted income for the 70%^ of its people that are not actually capable of earning money at all, [Nazi Cartel>Salon Kitty]; directly from the percecution in society, of the lawful minority; can be called nothing but "Anarchist". Therefore; for one last time; stop, because if the government don't send the Air Force in; then the governments that you are crushing, will consider the UK, an Anarchist state, run by delusional students, with full nuclear capability. I hope that is clear enough for all involved; & as for Tony Benn, he is a fucking lunatic; you can fire nuclear balistic weapons negative of any giude system; & he knows it; & i beg the government, scrap the nuclear fleet now, while you have enough control to do so; & tell the rest of the world; "Why". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.17.255 (talk • contribs) 2007-07-14

ITV Network Continuity Announcers - AfD incomplete nomination

Hi there

In regard to your nomination for the deletion of ITV Network Continuity Announcers, the AfD nomination was incomplete. In future, please refer to the steps at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion when nominating an article. I have listed the page on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 December 17 and completed the nomination. --tgheretford (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron Company Ltd

I am not quite clear about what you mean in your Merge cooment in the talk page for this article. Chevin 09:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry scratch that. I've worked out what was going on. Chevin 09:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hi Pit-yacker. Great work on the infoboxes, but I was wondering if you could remove the template with map and with map UA redirects whilst you are at it? Thanks, --Regan123 03:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you've been taking out the maps in the villages in surrey pages. They looked nice and served a purpose. Also I've been making an effort putting them in. SuzanneKn 11:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
To my knowledge, I havent removed any maps. For the most part I havent actually got to Surrey. Other than the instances listed below where they have been replaced with a new map, any removal of maps should have been an isolated accident, and I apologise if this has happened. Recently I have:
  • Replacing the very few remaining static maps for each community with the long/lat map
  • Replacing the more recent mapx= mapy= with the IMHO better contrasted, more standard, flexible (allows links to apps such as Google Earth) and editor friendly long/lat map.
  • Stripping out redundant calls to the coor title series templates caused by the long/lat maps. Not removing these causes two sets of co-ords to be placed at the top of the article, making both sets unreadable.
  • Stripped out redundant calls to various mapping templates in external links.
  • Stripped out redundant non-standard links to the likes of multimap street map, getmapping, et al - As far as I can tell these are not "preffered" as they do not give the user an option to choose which external map they use, unlike most of the templates.
  • Where no map exists on a page, I have added Latitude= and Longitude= to the template and removed the unused references to mapx= and mapy= and Map=. This makes it easier, if I or anyone else are adding maps to a number of pages as the attributes are already there. For any user adding a map, IMHO they are much easier to understand than the rather cryptic mapx= and mapy= and more efficient than map= which requires an individual image file to be created for each article.
Pit-yacker 15:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I sincerely apologise. I think I have rushed to conclusions here. Thank you for your very comprehensive reply and at least I now know that Lat & Long are the way to go rather than map x etc which I sometimes come across. Could I also trouble you by asking why my text in the editing box seems to now be one and half line spacing rather than previously one line spacing. Many thanks. Keep up the good work. SuzanneKn 18:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by the "editing box" it could be the set up of your computer? Pit-yacker 19:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Chard, Somerset

I reverted the page because when I looked at it, the info box was out of alignment and the text was all over the page. I reverted it back, and it seemd to be fine now, so don't know what happened there! Sorry about that. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul75 (talk • contribs) 2007-02-07

Tyne and Wear

Hello! I noticed you often edit articles which relate to North East England, so we at WikiProject North East England would like to invite you to become a member of the WikiProject. We work on creating, expanding and making general changes to North East England related articles. If you are interested in joining, feel free to visit the Project Page.

TellyaddictEditor review! 12:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Awards and WikiProjects!

Hi Pit-yacker! I've seen your username an awful lot lately in edit histories! I noticed you've been doing some fantastic work with the co-ordinates, and if you look at your user space you may find an award I bestowed secretly earlier on.

By total co-incidence, I came across a message of yours just now on the Manchester talk page.

I'd be very (very!) interested in co-founding a Greater Manchester WikiProject with yourself. I spend most of my time (life) editting Greater Manchester related articles, including Manchester itself and all the daughter articles.

I think I'd have some names who would also be interested in joining should we set it up.

Would you be interested? I very much hope so. Jhamez84 00:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Not heard from you since. But I've added my name and comments at the WikiProject proposal point. There are now five names on the list, though it has been around a month since the initial calls for editors. Should the project extend to Greater Manchester, I know of at least four other quality editors who would be willing to join.
You may also be interested in this map I've produced. It is likely that this will be used for all articles about settlements and areas of Greater Manchester as an infobox map. Jhamez84 02:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi sorry for not replying sooner. Thanks for the award, it is really nice to have your work recognised.
I think a Greater Manchester map will probably be more useful, as the current UK maps just show everywhere in an area as being in roughly the same location. The only thought that strikes me, is the conflicting interests of UK users and international users - I expect a large number of International users wont know where Greater Manchester is (I actually first thought about it when seeing the London map rather than Manchester). However, this conflict is probably a wider problem with the infoboxes in general rather than just Manchester. However, what the answer to this is I'm not sure, I certainly wouldn't want to see something like Drayton, Northamptonshire, which IMHO is excessive, or even Bishopston, Bristol - IMHO attempting to make both maps equal size doesnt work. Would it be possible to have a small UK map inset into the Greater Manchester map with Greater Manchester location in the UK marked on?
It would be good to get a Wikiproject going, as others have stated I think a Greater Manchester project is probably the best idea. If we can get more members that would be great.
Pit-yacker 02:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree that a national map should also be used, dispite creating the GM map. Like you say this is probably most useful for international readers, as well as children and the impaired. I've worked out that there is an option to have both a national and countywide map however, and I think this method will have to be employed when the time comes.
Just letting you know also, you have a sixth member interested. I'll contact some more users to register their interest. I am very keen on the project, and, in addition to getting alot of the GM articles upto scratch, revamping the Manchester and England lead sections, creating many of the GM sub-categories, have quite a lot of source material that is useful. I think this could be a real success. Jhamez84 02:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Sorry if I may be swamping your talk page. Just a line to let you know we have nine members encounting who have registered interest in the project. It is recommended that a project page is commenced once between 5-10 editors have registered. If it was yourself who created the proposal, do you intend to initiate proceedings? No rush at all, but we will need a fair bit of material (userboxes, headers, project page, guidelines, etc etc) when the time comes. Jhamez84 22:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

GtrManc WikiProject

I've expanded some of the text on the main project page, as well as formulated Template:WikiProject Greater Manchester. They are just initial ideas, feel free to improve. Jhamez84 01:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, for expanding that. It was hard to know where to start Pit-yacker 01:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • 1. ... By the start of the 19th century, Britain had over 1500 miles of industrial railway. 2. ... The first 'Scheduled Passenger Railway Service' started in 1830, from Liverpool to Manchester. 3. ... The building of the Liverpool Road Railway Station only started in 1830. 4. ... The opposite to 'true' is 'false', what constitutes a true railway or, indeed, a false one?

Taking the aforementioned facts into consideration, how can the statement, 'The world's first true railways started operating from the purpose built Liverpool Road railway station in Manchester.' be taken seriously? 80.192.242.187 21:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.

PS. I have looked through some of the other claims within the Manchester Council site, used as a verifiable citation, and some of it is rubbish, whilst the majority 'borders' on truth., reminiscent of the Wigan MBC claims on their site.

  • Thanks for the reply, in which you say .... '...the suggestion that construction strated in 1830 doesnt necessarily negate the suggestion that the station also opened in 1830? Pit-yacker 22:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC). To that I agree. However, it would be highly unlikely. I suggest, before trying to negate anything I say about this subject, you read this .... [[3]], paying particular attention to this section .... 'The design of the Liverpool Road passenger departure station seems to have based on that of Crown Street Station, the Liverpool terminus, which was already built by then ..... '. Was the Liverpool & Manchester Railway NOT a 'true railway? 80.192.242.187 22:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.

The first station was on "Water Street"; & not "Liverpool Road"; it was basic, you climed the steps to station > line level; & alighted; as simple as. As for "Liverpool Road"; it was built at a later date. You can still visit the orginal station, although, its just a car park these days; & yes you can see the original; "Walk Way". So the answer is yes it was for real. This answer is coming from the bloke in Manc; that you all hate, because i dont think that the University of Manchester; Euro-Mothership, in the sky project, is such a good idea. I want to start a movement of my own on Wiki-Kamp; its premiss being; rather than all you death cult types, killing all us sane folk, with our monies, that have been stolen off us; lets, us sane folk, start a cut throat razor fund for all these loonies, that want to die. Then it works two fold; they don't theive anymore; & we stay alive, rather than them taking us with them to the "Mothership in the Sky". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.191.221 (talk • contribs) 2007-07-15

Yawn! I (personally) was quite careful to state in the article that Liverpool Road is the oldest surviving railway station in the world as this is all I could find sources to back up. As for the University of Manchester and its sky project, death cults, etc. Yes, you are right you have found us out! Wikipedia is actually run from the University! But beware my superiors are annoyed! There is a mob of professor zombies on their way to your house now (you dont really believe we dont know where you live did you?). From there they will take you to the top floor of the Stopford building where the race of the aliens who run the university will experiment on you. My advice is to run (dont use transport of any type) - I advise you go to somewhere in the Scottish highlands and from there get to North Korea some how - it is the only place beyond the University's control. From there I welcome you to start a "Wiki-camp" warning the world.Pit-yacker 21:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Manchestrian

Manchestrian is simply wrong. It is definetely Mancunian. This article should therefore be deleted. David 21:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

UK map location dot problem

Hi, Can I ask for some help. On the Mendip Hills article a UK map is included with a Geobox. The red locator dot worked fine until recently - it nows shows the hills in Yorkshire not Somerset & no one has changed the X&Y corodinates on the article page. It seems to have happened since your rfd Infobox England place with map - there may be no connection between these things but I'm searching for explanations/solutions at present (as I have Mendip Hills on peer reiew & hope to g for FA status soon). Any help appreciated. — Rod talk 14:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what has happened. None of the infoboxes I have dealt with are called here so they wouldn't have changed it. User:Caroig has been making a number of changes to Template:Geobox Protected Area and templates called by that. I'm guessing this may be where the problem is? Pit-yacker 15:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks anyway between us we fixed the bug.— Rod talk 18:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice infobox

I like the info box you put at Southam, that's the new one I presume. Is there any chance you could put one of those at Rugby, Warwickshire and possibly Leamington Spa? G-Man * 22:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Awful InfoBox

PS. ... The infobox layout is fine, just the map is tragic!

  • You don't hang about, do you? .... Jemmy.

I disagree with Jemmy. It is within Greater Manchester, and I want to know whereabouts! We don't have maps of the UK telling us where in the Solar System it is. We aren't held to ransom like this on Greater London articles! This was this user's talk page up until recently. Jhamez84 01:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, for switching before debating further, I switched to UK map to stop the page being completely reverted, as the eventual plan is to delete England map it is an issue that will need to be confronted eventually. I guess we probably need to achieve a consensus among other editors on the talk page???? Pit-yacker 01:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


PS. ... The infobox layout is fine, just the map is tragic! Jhamez would purposely disagree with anything I suggest.

  • Don't be so childlike. This is a worldwide encyclopaedia. People from all over the world recognise the outline of the British Isles, most have never heard of Greater Manchester never mind being able to recognise it's outline. To anyone who doesn't know where Greater Manchester is, the map gives no information at all regarding a towns position. I propose leaving the British Isles map as it is, with towns marked on it in red, as it is. Standardisation, all the others have the understandable map. Jhamez is rather upset that I disagree with his ideas and edits, but one person can't be right all the time. 80.193.161.89 23:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.

PS... My apologies, the previous comment was aimed at Jhamez and not Pityacker. Jemmy.

This user appears to be targeting my edits of late, and making sweeping inferences. I'm happy to ignore. However, that aside, could you point me to the Tyne and Wear map that is used for the appropriate infoboxes? I'm keen on reviewing it and depending on it's looks, altering it so it has a consistent style with GM and GL. Jhamez84 12:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
They need attention to say the least! I'm a little tied up in real life at the moment, but I'll be happy to upgrade a few of these within the next few weeks. I'm sure the West Midlands (county) would be another city region which would benefit from this approach. Jhamez84 16:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I've asked (on the template talk page) for consensus for city-region specific maps to be used in infoboxes where a settlement forms a constituent part. You may wish to pass comment. I've linked two new maps there also - one is Gtr M/c map WITH a mini UK map added for context, the other is a newer version of the Tyne and Wear map you sent me (also featuring a UK mini map).
I also think the North East England infobox template should be put up for speedy delete now, as it is orfaned. Jhamez84 22:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I have replied to both issues at the pages. AFAICT, North East Infobox isnt orphaned yet? I prefer the minimap solution, however, I dont think this will satisfy certain parties, who just seem intent on eradicating any mention of the modern boundary layouts from Wikipedia Pit-yacker 22:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
You're right on both counts! I made a massive mistake with the NE infobox sorry - it is not orphaned no! User:MRSC raises what I think is a valid contention; that we generate the maps (with a UK mini map) automatically according to the fields inputted, as even if there is a massive consensus, anons are still likely to come along with forking issues. Jhamez84 23:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

infobox

OK just tell me where the consensus was achieved. I honestly don't know where the discussion page is and I would be interested to read it. Once I've read it I couldn't care less. Thanks

At several places, try looking through the archive of Template talk:Infobox England place, Template talk:Infobox UK place for a start. There was a consensus that the old template was too big, this prompted forks such as Template:Infobox Tyne and Wear place that attempted to cut down the box. The new one is functionally identical apart from three points:
1. "Historical" county is removed. The consensus for this has been achieved several times over.
2. Ceremonial County has been made optional where it is equal to the County. I dont know of a single case where the ceremonial wasnt actually equal to the Met/Shire County.
3. Redundant use of co-ords removed.

Pit-yacker 18:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The user who left the above comment bares hallmarks of being a single-purpose sockpuppet. Other simillar accounts have also appeared of late, centred on the content of the new infobox. I'll monitor the situation; if it intensifies we need to act quickly for a sockpuppet investigation to be conclusive. Jhamez84 21:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Pit-Yacker, please refer to the Ashton in Makerfield talk page. 80.193.161.89 23:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.

Geo microformat

It would be good if the WSG84 longitude and latitude co-ordinates in your templates could be presented using the Geo microformat in the mark-up. Please let me know if you need further information. Andy Mabbett 20:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I wasnt responsible for producing the template, I have been more involved in roll-out. You probably would be better discussing this at Template_talk:Infobox UK place
Pit-yacker 21:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I will do, thank you. Andy Mabbett 21:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

UK infobox template

Hi,

Just thought I'd point out that during your latest edits, you are duplicating edits I had made on a few of the Cornish articles (for example cornish_name). In particular I have noticed Falmouth, Cornwall and Looe. I don't know why they are being flagged up on your AWB, but thought I'd better mention it. The new template had already been added (I put the cornish name at the bottom of the box, in the order of the syntax example. I know it doesn't affect the result, but is AWB not recognising it). –MDCollins (talk) 14:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC) Hi. Apologies for that, whilst I converted the remainder of Cornwall I thought I would add the Cornish name to the UK box where it wasnt already added. I must have missed the Cornish name already being there on some articles Pit-yacker 14:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

The new infobox does look more compact. I just wondered why there was a repetition of info in the post code and the post code district. thanks SuzanneKn 20:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • "PostCode" is redundant from the old template. It should have been removed by the Auto-Wiki-Browser script.
  • "postcode_district" is the value which is displayed on screen - eg M14
  • "postcode_area" is used by the infobox to generate a link to the appropriate postal area article -e.g. entering M will link to M postcode area causing the postal district to be displayed as M14.
Hope this helps
Pit-yacker 20:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry to trouble you again. I also see that some of the info boxes that are changed have the police info and some don't. Is there a logic to this, ie size of town? SuzanneKn 20:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Police force should be automatically filled by the county. Pit-yacker 20:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry it's me again. I've been putting the info boxes in the Surrey villages and now there's this new one. If you look at Onslow Village and Ottershaw; you'll see that Onslow Village is wider and does not have a line feed for Constituency Country whilst the other one is slightly narrow and does. Why has this occured? Obviously it's better not to have the line feed. I used your template (picked up from somewhere you'd updated) for the Onslow Village and I've just come across Ottershaw. SuzanneKn 21:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, the problem is with the length of the constituency name, it actually something that I have come up against in other articles. I wasnt involved with the deep implmentation of the template (there are a number of people working on various aspects of it) to know how to fix it. I have, therefore posted a message at Template talk:Infobox UK place (if you dont, a full guide to the template is at Template:Infobox UK place) to see if it can be resolved by someone with more Template experience than me. Pit-yacker 21:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar Moved to User Page

AWB settings

My settings (based upon your most recent in your sandbox) won't convert post codes and post districts correctly for any infobox. Are you having the same problem? Any plans to look into this? Jhamez84 19:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi I have uploaded the latest version I have. This appears to work on (what I would class) as the common case. However, if the postcode is already Wikilinked it wont work. I havent worked out a way of correctly extracting the information within a postcode wikilink as there are several different forms that this information can take. Pit-yacker 19:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Taking a look at this, it appears that it is Wikilinking that is disrupting the convertion. I'll be mindful of it and try to change this manually - only around 50 English templates left! Jhamez84 21:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

A Short Story

Dear Pit-Yacker, you may delete this short story if you require, but please read it first.

I have a friend, named Les, who found himself 'out of work' a couple of years ago, through no fault of his own. He was a programmer, writing software for civil engineering companies. After being out of work for over twelve months, due to his health, he was sent by the DWP to work in a food processing factory in Ince, near Wigan. He was put on a production line, sat for eight hours a day ..... sticking potatoes on spikes as they passed him. He sat for ten days, sticking potatoes on spikes as they passed him, then, on the tenth night, he had a nervous breakdown (again) and had to be sectioned in a mental ward of Leigh Hospital. The reason, according to the specialists, was ..... sitting for ten days, sticking potatoes on spikes. What's this got to do with you? you may ask. Well, on looking at your contributions to Wikipedia, there appears a similarity between 'sitting entering the same thing, onto an article, over and over again, for hour, after hour, after hour' and 'sitting, sticking potatoes on spikes, over and over again, for hour, after hour, after hour'.

So, if your mouse starts to talk to you, it's time for a break! 80.193.161.89 00:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.

It's an automated editting program he (Pit-Yacker) is using called AWB (Automatic Wiki Browser). It's designed for rolling out mind-numbing labourious edits with relative ease. It is used for spelling corrections and adding categories amoungst other things. Registered users who demonstrate good faith and constistent contructive contribution are allowed to use it! Jhamez84 14:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

West Midlands

I've created a West Midlands county map for use in the UK place infobox - but I don't know how to set it up as an automated map like the others! Can you help/point me in the right direction? Jhamez84 07:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

All the others are done by Template:Location map which in turn calls the a local instance of the template e.g. Template:Location map Greater Manchester, then its case of just adding a call to location map to the new template. Pit-yacker 14:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Great stuff! It does need ammending however as you kindly directed me.... the test points for the motorway, was the dot in the wrong spot or the motorway itself? Jhamez84 18:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm guessing the dot was in the wrong place. I got the long/lat of the point from google maps. However, although, I got the edges of the map used in the template from the same place, they were just rough estimates, as I'm not too good at this. Is it possible you could do the fine tuning please? Pit-yacker 18:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll request it at the WM WikiProject. Jhamez84 21:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I've made some ammendments to this map. I've requested at the WM WikiProject that they advise me on where co-ordinates are not aligning with "true" locations. Jhamez84 01:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. There also appear to be a few problems with the alignment of the Tyne & Wear map (Template:Location map Tyne and Wear). For example, AFAICT Wallsend should be to the right on the other side of the borough boundary. I have left a message on the Templates Talk page. Pit-yacker 13:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed your message on my talk page (swallowed up by several other messages!). Great work with the Cheshire map! It was showing places a little too northerly before, but several users have provided various quick-n-easy methods as to how to work out the settings on the infobox UK place talk page! Glad these maps are being well received! Jhamez84 20:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 21:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheshire Map

Thanks for the work on this. At the moment, the map has the lowest locations pulled downwards. Malpas should be a little way inside the Cheshire border, whilst Mow Cop should be excatly on the border (I placed the lat-long exactly on the last, furthest north point of the High Street where the county border veers aways from the High Street), and so the position of Mow Cop's red dot can be judged reasonably accurately.) I'm not sure how to tweak the values myself, but would value any extra help you could give.  DDStretch  (talk) 12:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I've uploaded a newer, more detailed, and hopefully more accurately rendered version of the Cheshire infobox map. I've used more realiable sources for this version (Boundary Commission for England!), and so it should've have nearly as many failings of the previous one.
However, this said, the settings shown in your infobox will now require a reset I'm afraid, though it should take us a step closer to rolling it out.
I've also passed comment at the Gtr Mcr WP talk page regarding your work - great stuff BTW! Jhamez84 00:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Mertanz pitch

You are right to question the notability of the subject matter - it's an absolutely banal field in Oldham used by a local school, with no notable history to speak of. I would suggest it is put up for speedy deletion, with the content merged into the Hulme Grammar School article. Jhamez84 23:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

English county maps for infobox

Hello there,

I don't know whether you've created any of these or not, but saw that you were involved in testing some of them. I've created a list at Template talk:Infobox UK place/maps#English County Maps. Please update this with any you are in the process of making. Richard B 13:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Noticeboard

On your WikiProject noticeboard, do you only put up AfDs? If not, i have put a WP:RM on the Airport-Manchester Line Simply south 21:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Images of the University of Manchester

Hi there. There is an ongoing problem at University of Manchester with copyvio images. At least one of these, the image of the aquatics centre from here, has been uploaded and deleted more than once. There seems to be more than one user involved, but I am concerned about User:Miriam234, who has uploaded an image from here and tagged it, unsourced, with obviously incorrect free licences. Miriam234 is assuredly acting in good faith, but I wonder if you remember if Image:John Rylands Library Deansgate Inside.jpg is the same as Image:John Rylands Inside3.jpg, which was deleted last month?

I would like for University of Manchester to be well-illustrated as much as anyone else, but there are a few unfree images which seem to keep returning. — mholland (talk) 01:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

There does seem to be a problem with copright of images with University of Manchester articles. In this case, I'm pretty sure it is the same image as last month. Certainly Miriam234 uploaded the same set of images numerous times then. However, I cant say for certain. Pit-yacker 13:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I've left Miriam234 a polite note, and there's just the one infringing image remaining, tagged as a copyvio. I see no benefit in me making a fuss; I assume there'll be no further problems :) — mholland (talk) 14:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The Green Quarter

Hello, thank you for contributing your ideas and comments on The Green Quarter, but I really don't see why you have such a worriment against the article. The numerous websites on search engines would seem to represent the scale of this development. Besides, you seem to keep referring to on the discussion page, "as far as I can tell". So unless you are the developer, someone who has a degree or similar in a building related subject, a structural surveyor of the site or simply a resident, then I see no reason for you to be so bothered about deleting it. R_Orange 13:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

On a good article, I shouldnt need to say "As far as I can tell". The article should tell me exactly why it is notable. Wikipedia isnt meant to be a directory of every building development in the world, it just records ones that have some notability. For example Beetham Tower is arguably notable for its height and as such should get an article. If there is some notability then I am happy for the article to stay. However, at present the article presents no notability and I know of none either. Pit-yacker 17:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I feel frustrated, doesn't the number of websites when you search it signify anything? R_Orange 18:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Depends what the websites returned by the search are. I just quickly googled "Green Quarter" and the sites returned in the first 20 or so were mainly made up of a number of sites from various companies involved in the development, and estate agents trying to sell/let flats in the development.
Notability could potentially take a number of forms, for example the size of the site, or something that makes it different from most other developments. For example, the fact CIS Tower generates large amounts of solar engery makes it notable. Pit-yacker 18:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Revision Revert

I can see I have wrote twice on this talk page now, but this seems to be where I am ending up frequently quite recently. Please could you give me an explanation for reverting my revisions on this article. I don't see why they should have changed, so I'm perplexed as to the rationale. Thank You R_Orange 17:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Apologies. I'm confused to what I did myself. I think I must have edited an old version. I have now repaired the article. The intention was to Geo-tag, categorise, and remove the "They are out to get us" para and the list of subjects taught - if they taught something unusual that might be notable (Latin would be borderline, Ancient Greek perhaps) but the subjects taught are no different to any other school. Pit-yacker 17:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Because Barlow is a Specialist Science College is also offers specialist tutoring and lessons on Chemisty, Biology and Physics at GCSE level, should this be included? R_Orange 18:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
This should be mentioned in my opinion. But I think it should be stated rather than a rather long list of subjects.
Adding to my original reply, I think I was editting an old version. I categorised the article sometime ago, and the categorisation had disappeared. I was looking back to see where the categorisation had been removed. Pit-yacker 18:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Manchester's more obscure locations

Well, I never realised there was someone else out there who was actually interested in the less well-known facets of central Manchester. Apart from me, of course. Apologies for the sharp edit comment on the List of streets in Manchester re. Barton Square -- I now notice that the picture I've linked to from the street's article is yours! Hope to collaborate further on various articles. Cheers. Cheshire Set 01:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Portal:North_West_England

I appeal to you! Help me update it! Thanks. R_Orange 18:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Oldham

Please cease with the catergorization of 'Oldham'.

There is an article called 'Oldham' which relates directly to the town and an article called 'Metropolitan Borough of Oldham' which relates to the borough. By adding an 'Oldham' category to brough articles it makes places look like they are stuated in Oldham rather than the borough. You are confusing teh structre of these articles and the category is misleading at best. 88.104.34.14 02:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Pit-yacker. Regarding the above, I'd like to put an end to the arguement by creating two categories titled 'Metropolitan Borough of Oldham' (for the towns) and 'Oldham Local Education Authority' (for the schools), would you agree with this? I could easily argue against people removing these categories. At the moment I can't justify reverting any edits that remove 'Category:Oldham' or 'Category:Schools in Oldham' unless the article is directly related Peteb16 08:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Not entirely sure what you mean here. Do you mean creating Category:Schools in Oldham LEA (could the term "LEA" be a prob for private schools???) to replace Category:Schools in Oldham, which would be a sub-cat of Category:Metropolitan Borough of Oldham . I dont have a problem with that. I'm not sure about having categories for each town/village though - I'm worried it will encourage the inconsistent categoriation I have been trying to remove and/or over-categorisation Pit-yacker 18:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems today, someone else has carried out my suggestion anyway. They've used Category:Schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham instead of LEA, which as you say would rule out private schools. I never wanted seperate categories for different towns/villages however. I would suggest all the 'Oldham' only categories should be deleted. ~~ Peteb16 22:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree Pit-yacker 22:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jonathan Thompson

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jonathan Thompson, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Thompson. Thank you. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Category:Railway stations in Oldham

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Railway stations in Oldham, by Albireo223, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Railway stations in Oldham is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Railway stations in Oldham, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Railway stations in Oldham itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 01:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Category:Sport in Oldham

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Sport in Oldham, by Albireo223, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Sport in Oldham is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Sport in Oldham, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Sport in Oldham itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 01:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Category:Education in Oldham

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Education in Oldham, by Albireo223, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Education in Oldham is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Education in Oldham, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Education in Oldham itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Category:Government in Oldham

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Government in Oldham, by Albireo223, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Government in Oldham is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Government in Oldham, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Government in Oldham itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Category:Buildings and structures in Oldham

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Buildings and structures in Oldham, by Albireo223, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Buildings and structures in Oldham is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Buildings and structures in Oldham, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Buildings and structures in Oldham itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Categorisation on AWB

Hi! I notice you have used AWB to recat the Greater Manchester articles. Do you have the settings to do this as I would like to tackle other counties / LA districts as well. Cheers, Regan123 20:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I didnt use a script to do this. I just used the Categories section on the more tab. Hope this helps Pit-yacker 22:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! From Oldham (borough)

Thanks for your work regarding the categorisation of the Oldham borough articles - I believe you all came to the right decision, and should continue to use the system we have had for a long time.

I would've argued that, legally, we can't split categories by former local government districts as they were abolished - thus Oldham and Royton really don't have defined boundaries anymore. Also, these settlements that are "not" in Oldham, (such as Chadderton) have always been connected to Oldham, whether ecclesiastically, in commerce, in Westminster, and for the mostpart architecturally and culturally - hense why the modern borough takes the shape it does no doubt.

Thanks again for your support - let me know what I've missed and/or can contribute to! Jhamez84 22:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Re TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Cornish place with map

Hi Pit-yacker,

Template:Infobox Cornish place with map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page...

Thanks for your message; it looks like this infobox hasn't seen much use. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 17:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Stapleford Aerodrome

I removed the duplicate coorinate tags from the airport as it's already in the box. I'm gussing but the usual reason people put it in is to have the airport appear in Google Earth. If so it's not necessary as Google Earth does see the coordinates in the boxes. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Oldham categories at Cfd

The question of whether 'Oldham' cats should be renamed to 'Metropoloitan Borough of Oldham' has been taken to CfD, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_9#Oldham. As far as I can tell, this renaming proposal would apply to Wigan, Stockport and all other metropolitan boroughs - UK-wide - that share a name with a town. Your contributions would be welcome. Mr Stephen 15:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

WHY

You have removed my posts on the Falinge Park High School Page because I infringed copyright permission? But I wrote all the content on the site! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakfleming (talk • contribs) 2007-06-17

Chew Stoke FAC

Hi, I've recently put Chew Stoke up as a Featured Article candidate. As you have edited this article in the past I wondered if you would like to make any comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chew Stoke?— Rod talk 07:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Lancashire county map

Hello Pit-yacker! Long time no speak... I've had some time away from Wikipedia but hoping to get back into the swing of things!

I've created a Image:Lancashire outline map with UK.png, and have posted it to Wikicommons, but I'm unsure how to integrate and/or test this using the co-ordinate system we had going for the UK place infobox. Any chance of some aid?

Hope all is well, Jhamez84 20:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow! You don't mess about waiting! Seems the tests broadly look OK - though I really struggled getting the M65 and M61 motorway crossing points accurate. Do you think it needs ammending? I'm happy to do so. Looks OK for Lancaster, I may try it out for some other settlements.
Also, I've had some support on the infobox talk page for changing the Northern Ireland map, any change you could? I must apologise for my very poor mathematics, which hinder my map calibration abilities! Jhamez84 23:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I've had a look at some Lancashire settlements and found that Fleetwood, and Colne are not accurately pointed. It looks as though the east-west calibration is set too narrow - it's probably stemmed from the inaccuracy of the Motorways (which I struggled getting accurate source material for). Not sure if that helps, Jhamez84 00:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I do beg your pardon. I've uploaded a corrected version of this map as I'd made some errors. Is it possible for a reset? Should function adequately this time. Jhamez84 20:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Excellent stuff! I've looked on a broad range of Lancs articles and it's functioning perfectly! Thank you a thousand times! Onwards and upwards with this project it seems! Jhamez84 21:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Great work on getting the co-ordinates fixed - I kept trying, but couldn't get them spot on. Warofdreams talk 01:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Maps

Thanks--you're great! When I started making maps a couple of years ago I inquired whether there was a function that would automatically plot the dot according to the coordinates, and was told that there was no such function. So something must have been discovered since then. Glad to know it is available for U.S. maps--has there been any use of it yet? If so, I'd like to be acquainted with whoever is doing that. There is so much useless busywork that is being done at WP lately and the dot-on maps project is one that nobody seems to be taking on in an organized way, preferring, for example, to tag images, etc. Badagnani 19:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks--this is good to know. But I'm dismayed that when one goes to the template, nothing is there to explain how to use it. That's very un-Wikipedian, as most of our code is very user-friendly and easy to learn. Is it possible to have a demonstration of how one might make JUST a map of a state, showing where in the state the town is? (For Long Island, New York, for example, I'd probably make a new page just featuring the island.) But for Pennsylvania or whatever, I'd love to know how to just do a map with the town on it, without using the full infobox. Badagnani 22:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Invite to WikiProject Spam

Hello, Pit-yacker. Thanks for your help removing linkspam from Wikipedia! If you're interested, come visit us at WikiProject Spam and help fight linkspammers on Wikipedia. Hu12 01:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

New maps

Hello Pit-yacker!

Just wanted to let you know that I've had to change my account name due to some security problems, so don't be alarmed or think I'm a sock puppet etc!

I've created and uploaded a Merseyside infobox map to Wikicommons and was wondering (if you get chance) if you can work your magic upon it??? I'd be very grateful!

I believe that's all the metropolitan counties done then. I intend to upload a couple of shire county maps if not tonight, then over the weekend. Hope all is well, Jza84 20:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent stuff! I worked hard this time on the motorway points as I realised they are central to the calibration. Looks good to impliment if you ask me! Thanks ever so much! I think we deserve much more credit for our efforts here! hehe! I'm working on Lincolnshire as we speak also. Leicestershire and Cumbria after that. Jza84 20:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello again. I've added the Merseyside map to the UK place infobox (see Birkenhead, St Helens, Merseyside, Southport), and it seems to point good, and otherwise look and function properly.
Great work Jza84, I've been hoping someone someday would do a Merseyside map. Thanks Pit-yacker for updating the Merseyside article's maps, beating me to it! Snowy 1973 23:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
I've just uploaded a new Leicestershire map, and was wondering if you are able to do the same? Hope so, Jza84 00:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
We now have a Leicestershire image which requires calibration. Do let me know if I'm becoming a burden - I'm sure there are other users who could help (I tried Lincs but failed hopelessly!). I've temporarily lost my AWB membership due to my name change, but have rolled out some maps to the larger settlements to bring people's attention to their existence. Jza84 13:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, I appreciate your hard work and team spirit. I'll try to roll out as many of these as possible. Jza84 18:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland map

Is there any possible slightest chance you are able to calibrate the proposed Northern Ireland map on the UK place talk page (the second, newer version which is shown there)? Seems to be a consensus now to use it. Hope you can help, Jza84 13:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! That's a great addition to the infobox I think... I've been converting some of the Irish infoboxes to UK ones (seems to have been a goal of the rollout for sometime but not actioned) to help with the rollout and perhaps get feedback.
I've also written some proposed new artice structure guidelines in my sandbox, which I'd be grateful if you could pass comment on these (possible improvements perhaps) at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography/How_to_write_about_settlements#Proposed_restructuring. Thanks again, Jza84 11:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Co-ordinates

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. For some reason I can only see that they display strangely when transcluded by the UK infobox (e.g. Falmouth, Cornwall, but not by anything else (e.g. Cotswolds). That is why I thought it was the UK template.

Can you look at Harlesden - its one I've just found that kind of fits my second question. At the moment there isn't a map, because obviously the coordinates haven't been entered into the infobox. They are in a {{coor title d}} template - so would I be correct in simply remove that template and inserting the coord into the infobox, or do they need duplicating leaving both in place?

Thanks, –MDCollins (talk) 23:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

reflist

Ah now you're obviously a cleverer person than I, so how exactly did you get the multiple references thing to work on Manchester Cathedral Steps, where I'd put references to the books and authors? I tried but it just wouldn't have it. Parrot of Doom 23:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

RE:UK's third city

I thought he meant this, but has any concencus been agreed on this or is there any proof? It's also difficult to tell what is meant simply by ",..the UK's third city". Thanks for informing me of this, and if there is any further discussion on "UK's third city", please tell me so I can get involved. Thanks -JacќяМ ¿Qué? 03:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting what someone had added to my talk page. I've already warned them per refactoring others' talk page comments. Thanks for this. Do we know if it's the same person using several ip's? It would seem that way. -JacќяМ ¿Qué? 15:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I posted something on that page, 3 more IP's which have made similar edits. Thanks for telling me about this discussion. "Also named ips have made similar edits: 79.73.139.8, 79.73.239.0 and 79.73.204.237. Two edited my talk page editing others comments on Manchester to put ".. UK's third city". -JacќяМ ¿Qué? 16:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)" (-JacќяМ ¿Qué? 16:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC))

Barnstar

Anti-Vandalism Barnstar from User:And-Rew copied to User page... Pit-yacker 14:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Manchester vandal

I've rangeblocked those addresses for another 24 hours. The last block didn't seem to cause any collateral damage, so I don't see any problem extending it. ELIMINATORJR 23:25, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Wyberslegh Hall

Dear Pit-Yacker: I've put various items of info onto the Discussion page for Wyberslegh, in which you showed an interest. If you wish to promote any of it to the Wyberslegh page itself, feel free - AG, Stockport, UK.

Replied at Talk:Wyberslegh Hall Pit-yacker 22:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pit-yacker/Archive1&oldid=1136152656"