User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 4

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

See here. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Message left. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64. You have new messages at Go Phightins!'s talk page.
Message added 20:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Go Phightins! 20:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me asking for template advice (if you have time, of course). You helped me previously here. Anonymouse helped me here, but he (or she) is at present away on holiday. My questions are:

• Would it be easy to display Wikipedia's "external link" symbol after the link generated by his template and mine? and
• For [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Björn+Borg%22+-site%3A*.se+-site%3Asv.*+-site%3Awikipedia.org+-wikipedia [[Björn Borg]] ], the combination of a Wikilink and an external link, is there some easy way of making the "external link" symbol display after the link rather than before it? LittleBen (talk) 03:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Redrose, with your help in converting the infobox so promptly! Regards, --Bermicourt (talk) 12:45, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Having spent the past hour or so working through Butt and other locations, this page is no longer a REDIRECT page and in now a DISAMBIG page. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 12:35, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Alexandra Park railway station is, yes: but Alexandra park railway station is still a redirect. In any case, it should be clear why a hatnote is present - if the user is confronted with "For other places with the same name, see Alexandra Park railway station." at the top of Wilbraham Road railway station they're going to be puzzled as to why. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:27, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I had this problem when another editor did not realise that Fazakerley railway station started life as Aintree. I dropped Stewart a note about this. Britmax (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Just found

WP:NAMB which is relevant in such cases. --Redrose64 (talk

) 14:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I welcome your help on this. Both Alexandra Parade and Wilbraham Road have been called Alexandra Park. The text of Wilbraham Road states the change was due to potential confusion with Alexandra Park in London (see the various Alexandra Palace stations). What is also interesting is that Alexandra Parade and Wilbraham Road were both renamed in July 1923, just after grouping and came under the care of the LNER. Thoughts?? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 20:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes, they did previously have those names. But is it possible that somebody will get to either

WP:NAMB

. We should put a hatnote on the more-ambiguous name which directs readers to the less-ambiguous name, but not the other way around.

For example, when I noticed that Butt (1995) had no less than seven entries for stations named simply "St Helens", and a further five for variants like "St Helens Central", I created the dab page St Helens railway station. This presently has six entries, because we have six articles on stations which had "St Helens" as part of the name at one time or another (there may eventually be up to nine entries in the dab page because three of the twelve entries in Butt relate to renamed stations): but of these six articles, only one warrants a hatnote, since there have been two stations named St Helens Central - none of the other article titles are ambiguous. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I think Aberdeen has even more entries than St Helens. I like the revised wording from Britmax (talk · contribs). --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 11:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Finally! Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Wikify_.28again.29. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Snapshot with rev 8686 is up! It fixes the wikify issue and it is faster than the previous versions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:13, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Redrose,
Please see Template talk:Infobox train#Additional fields and Template talk:Infobox train#Add parameter "fuelcap". Peter Horn User talk 19:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind if I quickly grab your opinion on this? Burwell railway station is currently showing as being in East Cambridgeshire which is strictly speaking true, although East Cambs didn't come into existence until a decade after the station closed down. Best leaving it as it is, or would it be better to reflect the situation on the ground as it was then, i.e. amending it to Newmarket Rural District? With the Beeching cuts, I'm sure this must have come up elsewhere but not aware if a precedent has been determined already. - Cheers, JCJ of Burwell (Talk) 02:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know exactly where, but it was decided some time ago (some of the docs listed at

Template:Infobox UK disused station#Example. The site of Burwell railway station lies within present-day East Cambridgeshire, less than a mile from the Suffolk border. --Redrose64 (talk

) 10:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Seems fair enough. Thought I should ask about that one before making a change, so shall leave that as is. Cheers :) - Cheers, JCJ of Burwell (Talk) 11:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi... I'd point out that the NEIMME source states that Bell was "the director" of NER. The mining institute was totally familiar with companies having boards of directors, so when it says "the" it must mean it: I was/am just using the source. I take it that the modern equivalent would be CEO or as we used to say "managing director" - of course no 19th century source could say that as it didn't exist. Georgina Howell's "Gertrude Bell" (paper, Farrar Strauss Giroux, 2008) also has "He was also the director of the North Eastern Railway". (Howell, 2008. p8) I'd like to re-insert the "the", please. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Please see

• Tomlinson, W.W. (1915). The North Eastern Railway: its Rise and Development. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Andrew Reid and Company. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

where in Appendix B: List of Directors from the Amalgamation in 1854 to 1914 (

North Eastern Railway are listed alphabetically; Sir Lowthian Bell is listed fourth. A quick glance at the list shows several names who were Directors at one time or another between 1865 and 1904, so Bell was not the only one; indeed, his son Hugh

was elected a Director on 9 January 1903 - almost two years before the death of Sir Lowthian Bell.

Other Directors of this period include such notables as:

John Dent Dent (director 1879-94, Chairman 1880-94); Matthew White Ridley, 1st Viscount Ridley (director 1881-1904, Chairman 1902-04); Sir Edward Grey, Bart (director 1885-1911, Chairman 1904-05); and Henry Tennant

(director 1891-1910).

Bell was not the most important Director: Appendix C (Tomlinson 1915, p. 771) shows that Bell was never Chairman of the NER Board of Directors, although he was Deputy Chairman from 1895 until 1904 (under Sir Joseph Pease, Ridley and [for less than four weeks] Grey). There are other mentions of Bell in the book - the index (Tomlinson 1915, p. 782) shows seven page numbers concerning Bell. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for finding that out, I knew they were important given the story about a train being held for Hugh in London... I think they're well worth mentioning given their colourfulness, however. The fact that they were known to station guards is remarkable - can't have been true of all 79 directors, I think. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Which story is that? It doesn't seem to be mentioned at

Sir Lowthian Bell, 1st Baronet. --Redrose64 (talk

) 11:12, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

BTW I've just found that Bell was deputy chairman under Earl Grey for just four days, not four weeks - Appendix A (Tomlinson 1915, p. 761) shows that Sir Edward Grey, Bart [later the fourth Earl Grey] was elected Chairman on 16 December 1904 - Bell died 20 December 1904. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

The story runs (as printed by Howell): "As the heirs of the director of the North Eastern Railway, the Hugh Bells were transport royalty. At Middlesbrough the stationmaster doffed his hat to them and ushered them onto the train at Redcar. Many years later, Florence's daughter Lady Richmond was to remember an occasion when she was seeing her father off from King's Cross, and he had remained on the platform so that they could talk until the train left. The packed train failed to leave on time. Remarking on its lateness, they continued to talk until they were approached by a guard. 'If you would like to finish your conversation, Sir Hugh', he suggested, doffing his hat, 'we will then be ready to depart'." (Howell, 2008. p13.) I'm not sure whether to quote or paraphrase. I believe I was actually told this story by my History teacher when I was about 10, so it's nice to see it in print. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any reason not to include it - but I should point out that the

guard is not part of the station staff, but is a member of the train's staff. It was one of the duties of the guard to ensure that all doors were closed before blowing the whistle and showing the green flag as an instruction to the driver to start the train; so it would have been improper for the train to start with the door of Sir Hugh's compartment still open. --Redrose64 (talk

) 15:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I've included a paraphrase in Hugh Bell.... if you'd like to use whatever you like in NER, and perhaps some of your fascinating list of directors also? Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

This is an automated message from

Bot is certainly confused, and is also trigger-happy. I followed

WP:SPLIT - or at least was in the process of doing that - when the bot pounced. --Redrose64 (talk

) 20:22, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I'd appreciate any help you can give. C'ya! --BroJohnE (talk) 00:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Much of this is covered at

WP:TPO which covers what you may and may not do to comments entered by other users. The main thing is not to change the meaning of existing text. --Redrose64 (talk

) 00:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

What about the protection requests themselves. Am I able to delete those, or do they need to remain as part of the record of talk page? --BroJohnE (talk) 03:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

They should remain, since they each have more than one participant. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help with my iw links here. It now looks so obvious! - Llywelyn2000 (talk) 21:54, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I have provided information which has come from Luton County court, and Lincolnshire police. I don't think anyone else has taken the trouble to update this information, so I have done it, although I have to be careful what detail I go into. I shall continue to monitor the situation, because I am in a position to do so, and update accordingly. I don't intend to put individuals names or anything like that, but the information I have put is 100% accurate. If you so desire you can verify the court papers, the reference is given in the notes. I think the situation that has developed is pretty much unprecedented and very important, at least to the preservation movement. No one has attempted the audacious act of stealing a complete locomotive for its scrap value before - at least to my knowledge.

Unfortunately, some individuals, including yourself, seem determined to turn the wiki page into a battleground. Thus preventing the true situation from being described. The locomotive has not been sold for scrap, or anything like it. Parts have been stolen by opportunistic thieves and justice is being sought. Two court injunctions have been granted by the courts and a police investigation is under way. If you will permit me, I will update the page accurately and accordingly. Otherwise it will be nothing but a mess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.122.243.185 (talk) 22:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Please read the

cite your sources. Stating "the information I have put is 100% accurate" is simply not good enough. --Redrose64 (talk

) 22:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this page - much appreciated. I have removed or converted all the external links to references now so I assume it is OK to remove the external links notice.--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, you're right... I forget the B3110 road goes pretty much west-to-east there, though its general thrust from Odd Down to Woolverton is more north-south. I'd argue though that the 1919 map places the S&D station too close to the main road (it was quite a bit behind the pub which is actually on the road) while my memory of clambering over these things 50 years ago is that the overgrown track to the GWR halt led pretty directly up on to the remains of the embankment next to the road. So I'd believe "east" more than "north-east". Memory, however, isn't the same as documentary evidence... Johnlp (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

It's certainly closer to east than to north - we could put east-northeast. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:24, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll leave that to your judgement. Johnlp (talk) 21:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Moved to

Template talk:Catholicism § Edit Request on October 08, 2012

 – Redrose64 (talk

) 09:47, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply at Authorlink parameter. You indicated that I needed to establish a consensus for the alteration. Where would be the best place to start that consensus discussion? -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:53, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually, Redrose64, you can save me a lot of time. What do you think of my suggestion to add a "yes" condition option to the authorlink parameter? -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Since you've already started a thread at

Template talk:Citation#Authorlink parameter, that would be the place to build consensus. But it won't do any harm to post a short message onto each of: Help talk:Citation Style 2; Template talk:Citation/core; Wikipedia talk:Citation templates

, directing people to Template talk:Citation.

Regarding the concept of |authorlink=yes, I shouldn't opine here, per

Template talk:Citation#Authorlink parameter. --Redrose64 (talk

) 17:44, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the court references for me. I wasn't expecting a workaround like that, but if it works, it works! Xaxafrad (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this change, although I am wondering if it could be simplified. in any event, you should probably do the same to Template:Infobox UK feature and Template:Infobox UK place. Frietjes (talk) 23:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I did find according to the article that the London Necropolis Company was no longer independent as of January 1959 if this helps with anything. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 11:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't recall what this might be in direct relation to. My recent issues with London Necropolis Company have concerned the problem where it's twice been scheduled for TFA, and tagged accordingly by a bot - but in both cases was later pulled, and there was no reversal of the bot edit until a human noticed the problem some time after its original scheduled TFA day. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

{{talkback|WT:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement|More typos}} The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 09:59, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Actually, I've

Have you looked at the guy's edit history? I'm far from convinced that rational debate is really going to work here. But good luck, and please feel supportive thoughts from my general direction. Cheers DBaK (talk) 23:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Yep, already crossed swords at Denham Golf Club railway station. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:07, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Ah. Indeed. Clearly a strongly issue-committed editor. Cheers DBaK (talk) 23:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

THANK YOU> So I put our chat below! You Can Walk Like A'Gyptian  ;) (talk) 09:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

One hour on, and nothing received yet: did you send it to somebody else? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:08, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

see this edit request, and related thread at template talk:infobox number. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 19:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Redrose64 (talk) 20:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the sandbox help here; I've implemented it. Would you please check back to ensure that I did the right thing? Nyttend (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's Greetings, Redrose64! At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD | Talk 18:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

• This year we get both The Snowman and The Snowmen as TV treats. I doubt that they will ever be confused for one another :-) Have a great 2013 and continued happy editing! MarnetteD | Talk 18:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 18:39, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for changing it! I am new to this and I could not quite get how to get the correct command line in. Thanks once again!

Alastair Carr (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. My name's Alastair and I've been asked by the Ravenglass and Eskdale Railway to snaz up their wiki page. I've done most of it, but I wondered if you could tell me how to remove the navbar on Ravenglass and Eskdale Railway route diagram, without removing it from the actual route template.

That would be so helpful.

I await your reply.

Alastair Carr (talk) 20:08, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

This edit should have sorted it. Every <noinclude> must be balanced by a </noinclude> and vice versa. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately it is sent everything else out of proportion! Look below and also at the individual pages!

Alastair Carr (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. I reret to inform you that I've undone all of your editing on the template, because it sent every other page in which the route template was on, out of proportion, all 'haywire'. .

I am very sorry, but I've created a new route template, which is similar, but contains your <nonincludes>s. However, I can't seem to get it working again!

I am so very sorry, but I wondered if you could have a look at the new template, it's under Template:Ravenglass and Eskdale Railway (header)

{{Ravenglass and Eskdale Railway (header)}}.

I can't seem, for the life of me, to get rid of the Legend!

Have a very Merry Christmas.

Alastair Carr (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I have notified the administrators of you undoing most things I write, withouty explanation when I question you about why this is done.

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Alastair Carr (talk) 14:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I plead "Not guilty". I note that you have amended the AN/I thread but you have not retracted the above notice. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:16, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

My proposed stub would include people who are Jewish by descent i.e. secular, ethnic Jews, whereas the current one only seems to encompass Jews who are religious.Evildoer187 (talk) 02:08, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I see that you have also replied at

WP:MULTI). It's worse if the two replies differ - even if the differences are minor - since people will get confused as to your real intent. --Redrose64 (talk

) 21:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. You were right on the counts you listed. I still intend to corrrect the article as is WRT DOug Jack's The Leyland Bus (Mark 2) Stephen Allcroft (talk) 13:50, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The purpose of that test was to find some way to make the two templates together collapsible but still editable, as it will be inevitable the table takes up a lot of the article in some cases e.g. ECML, WCML, etc. I thought there was no point in reverting the test as looking at the current articles, it did not seem to be doing anything. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 00:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I also found your edit summary rather odd as there was nothing wrong with the braces\brackets. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 13:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Here is your edit. You added five opening braces but only three closing braces. The number of opening and closing braces must balance; thus there were two closing braces missing. Even if I had added a pair, I did not know where they should have gone; and doing that would have left an incomplete switch statement. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Boglaball. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 21:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Eh, what? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Just saying random gibberish when I've done something wrong. Anyway seriously I've worked out how to do the collapsing so the above problem shouldn't be so big in the future. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 22:22, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually could you help me on another small problem with station usage? For 2002/03 I have tried looking up Seaforth but I have found usage instead for two Seafords. Obviously Seaforth is one of them but I cannot discern which is which. Should I record this as No data? I am currently doing the

Northern Line (Merseyrail). Simply south......

walking into bells for just 6 years 12:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

In the absence of 2003/04 data that we could back-calculate from, I would compare the figures for 2004/05; 2005/06; and 2006/07:

Since one of the two stations has figures that are consistently higher than those of the other, it's a probability that the same station had higher figures in 2002/03. So I would say that the one ranked 516, with 493,247 total entries/exits is

Seaford, and the one ranked 965, with 176,145 total entries/exits is Seaforth & Litherland. --Redrose64 (talk

) 13:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Cheers. I'll go with that. Simply south...... walking into bells for just 6 years 14:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Is it the various splits or the 750V your questioning? Both Metrolink and Merseyrail use 750v DC. --Kitchen Knife (talk) 17:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

It's the 750 V for overhead electrification. Yes the Merseyrail Northern Line is 750 V DC third rail, and Manchester Metrolink is 750 V DC overhead, but why would Metrolink be a factor? That isn't planned to link up with Merseyrail; however, there are proposals to electrify Manchester-Bolton-Preston at 25 kV AC overhead. It would be logical to add Manchester-Wigan-Southport also Bolton-Wigan at a later date; but if Wigan Wallgate is electrified at 750V DC overhead, such a scheme would be very difficult. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

It is Metrolink who have expressed an interest in running to Wigan Wallgate via electrification. I'm not aware of any other plans to electrify Southport to Manchester, can't find any details of the plan. Exactly what the plans for Burscough curve usage are I'm not sure but that is usually referred to Merseyrail Extensions as is Ormskirk-Preston. Having all 750v would seem the most sensible.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 18:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello!

I ask you because you are the only person clearly sympathetic to the idea to keep CSD clean. In the recent conflict, did I, Incnis Mrsi, make some tactical errors? How to deter better such attempts to push a crap into written, established rules, to convert such items as G6 to sumps? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Good catch! Missed that one. Britmax (talk) 11:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I removed the same two cats from four other stations on the same branch. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry - that was my fault. Edit conflict screwup then rectified, as you realized. Sorry it looked like I was starting a conflict over it! Cheers DBaK (talk) 16:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for adding colour to the Indian railway station succession templates. However, in the process one unwanted change has taken place. Earlier, the station name with suffix ‘railway station’ was automatically getting linked when the name was being placed in the ‘previous’ or ‘following’ box. See

Sorry - has this edit sorted it? --Redrose64 (talk) 11:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Seems to be okay now. Many thanks. Cheers. - Chandan Guha (talk) 14:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello R. I know that you will see my post at the project talk page eventually but I wanted to let you know that I added this Doctor Who merchandise#Commemorative stamps to that article. I thought that, when you have the time, you might add the info that you have about the Dalek stamp from 1999. Anything that you think appropriate will be fine and my commiserations about the missing set of stamps. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 18:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

For fixing Template:Inflation. I know this modest reward is small recompense for your work but I hope you find some benefit from these tokens of my appreciation. In addition, while we don't live by bread alone, I am told these coins are edible. Thank you. Jojalozzo 21:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Reply to post by Redrose64

Thanks – albeit, belated – for the explanation (although most of it went "over my head", to be honest). Nonetheless, I will try to refrain from this practice. Thank you. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64, per this edit, please see below:

• Capitalisation:

The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music#Capitalization states:

• "Standard English text formatting and capitalization rules apply to the names of bands and individual artists".

The

• "Mid-sentence, per the MoS, the word 'the' should in general not be capitalized in continuous prose, e.g. 'Wings featured Paul McCartney from the Beatles and Denny Laine from the Moody Blues.'"

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (music)#Capitalization states:

• In band names, and titles of songs or albums, capitalize all words except:

• articles (an, a, the)

I've reverted your reversion based on these guidelines. Please take to talk if you disagree. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The Manual of Style is vast, so please don't just put "per MoS" in your edit summaries; link the relevant section.

In the case of "The Band", the capitalisation resolves an ambiguity: it indicates specifically that we are referring to the group who worked with Bob Dylan; whereas if we put "the Band", it could be seen as a typo for "the band", i.e. Fairport Convention themselves. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

You declined my request, for the reason "Please see

It was not at all clear at

WP:RFD#HOWTO

to be done for you: it read as a general comment.

If you carry out stage II of

subst:rfd}}, it will be done. --Redrose64 (talk

) 15:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you think we should reschedule this? I looks like you and I are the only confirmed attendees. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Given the weather (4 ins snow where I live in Didcot, v. slippery), I'm likely to cry off in any case, so a resched is probably a good idea. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I can just change it to 24 Feb and you reschedule the geonotice? Philafrenzy (talk) 12:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

24 Feb is just one week before Oxford 3; also, third Sunday would be 17 Feb, so how about that? London 66 is 10 Feb.

When I fix the geonotice, I'll also post to those who were at Oxford 2. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes 17th. I will make it Reading 4 in order to preserve the page for 3. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to join the 'cry off-ers' this morning but having had to reschedule other things because of the weather I thought it best to duck out. Will try and make February 17th but know I have one commitment that day. Dsergeant (talk) 16:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Redrose, Can you halp me to use the coordinates variable in Infobox Military structure ? I always prefer to use degrees, minutes and seconds. But I think the template accepts only decimal values after the degrees. (Infobox Populated places accepts both types of coordinate designations.) Is there any way to enter the coordinates in minutes and seconds or shoud I have to convert the minutes into decimal values before entering ? Thanks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

You are correct in that {{

Infobox military structure}} accepts only decimal degrees in the |latitude= |longitude= parameters. Fortunately there is a simple conversion function, the {{decdeg

}} template, which takes five parameters - degrees, minutes, seconds, hemisphere, and precision (number of decimal places):

| latitude  = {{decdeg|52|20|47|N|4}}
| longitude = {{decdeg|1|35|23|W|4}}

| latitude  = 52.3464
| longitude = -1.5897

See

WP:OPCOORD for information on a suitable number of decimal places - four (as in my example) is an accuracy of about ten metres. --Redrose64 (talk

) 11:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Re your comment, "The main page problem began very recently, and has affected many users whether logged in or not. By contrast, users who are not logged in have always been served cached copies of most pages, primarily for reasons of speed." — How often are cached copies updated? --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:40, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Please repost this at

WP:VPT#Users reporting site time issues and delay in visible update of edits, which is the thread where I posted the comment you quote above. That page has a far larger watchlist than this one; also, its watchers know far more about the detail than I do. Also, I dislike split discussions, becuse they are difficult for a third person to follow. --Redrose64 (talk

) 13:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I reposted it per your advice.[1] Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. Headhitter (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for setting the importance parameter etc. Category:Top-importance Environment articles had already been created but it has a typo. Can you fix it? I am category topic banned. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:50, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I've thrown out what was there already, and replaced with templates matching those on High/Mid/etc. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. There are a lot more articles that should be in the new categories since they already have the parameters added. There is a bit of a trick that gets the database to recognise them. I had the same issues with populating Category:Articles with missing files. It would be nice to get them populated by running that trick on Category:Environment articles by quality subcats. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64! Would you please give some brief advice about adminship? I'm thinking about taking on the task of admin, and I'd like to know how you compare being an admin-editor with being an editor only. Do you ever feel bogged down to the extent that you can't do the type of edits you like to do? Any info you can give me about being an admin would help a great deal. Thank you for all your help, past–present–future! – Paine (Climax!)  21:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, as with anything else on Wikipedia, there's no obligation to do anything. For example, the admin tools include

editing protected pages - I have this page on my watchlist so that I know what's been requested, and if it's something that I believe is a good edit request, I carry it out, as with these edits

.

One of the most useful of the admin tools is the ability to

WP:RFA

won't go well for you if that's all you want to do.

This summary shows that I haven't done much blocking or protecting, compared to (say) page deletions. I have been known to file a request at WP:RFPP, rather than protect the page myself. Don't be misled where the summary implies that I created accounts for two other users: they were both for myself. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:38, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

That's just great! It sounds as if you really like what you do as an administrator here on Wikipedia. What do you feel might be the "negatives" of adminship? You know, the things you may run into from time to time that you're just not too crazy about? And thank you for your shining response, above! – Paine (Climax!)  23:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the most negative thing was the RFA process itself, see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Redrose64. One thing that I was afraid of, but hasn't really happened, is the nasty remarks that deleting admins occasionally get "why did you delete my article you b******? I've started an WP:ANI about you: reinstate my article immediately". --Redrose64 (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's a concern for me, too. Maybe it's all in how you do the process. I've thought about it, and rather than wait for something like that to happen, I imagine I would get to the author first, let them know what is wrong and tell them what they can do. Also, do you think it's better to delete completely, or delete and userfy? – Paine (Climax!)  19:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Each case needs to be considered on its own merits. Very often, whether to userfy or not will emerge during an

WP:CSDs

never result in userfication, only keep or delete); but XFDs should not be decided on a simple majority vote - the arguments put forward by each side need to be weighed against each other.

Even

WP:CSDs

are not always straightforward - they may have been placed in error, possibly by somebody unfamiliar with policies. The admin coming across one of these is not constrained to delete.

If you feel unable to judge the outcome of a deletion request - regardless of whether it's

WP:CFD

you can post to the relevant talk page.

If you put some open

WP:CFD/etc., you'll learn who are the admins who regularly close deletion discussions; you can then post to one of their talk pages, asking how they made the decision. --Redrose64 (talk

) 20:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, that's a good deal to think about. I'll let you know if I make it to the !polls. – Paine (Climax!)  17:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears that you've been covering for Martin on his talk page. As there's no break notice, is he feeling ill again? – Paine (Climax!)  19:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I've been covering for Martin ever since I succeeded at RFA! I don't know why he occasionally takes periodic absence though. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

A good while back I remember him placing health-issue notices on his User page. Let's hope he's okay. – Paine (Climax!)  19:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Howdy. Thank you for responding to my edit request. It didn't occur to me to check for a hidden div. I will keep that in mind in the future. On a more minor note, it appears you didn't sign your comment there. I checked, and there is no signature in a hidden div. ;) Rockfang (talk) 20:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you  Done, and more added --Redrose64 (talk) 20:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Considering that most of the article is unreferenced, perhaps you could justify your reversion of this claim.

I am not trying to be funny, but if you have an issue with this then why not with the rest of the article.Bhtpbank (talk) 00:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a

WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim (hmmm - that reminds me - I still haven't had a reply to this). --Redrose64 (talk

) 09:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: [2] "in Britain we put the imperial measure first", do you have a MOS link? I can't recall and haven't found anything in

I'm going by what I have observed on hundreds of other articles about British railway lines and stations. Please also note that it was not me who first changed the order of the units in this article - if you look at the version prior to Picapica's edit you'll see that it's Imperial first; the |disp=flip exchanges the order of presentation within {{convert}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I think there are two issues here; one is the implication that "in Britain we put the imperial measure first". This is clearly not the case, neither does it appear to be supported by policy or guidelines. Please consider raising and/or proposing changing the MOS if they are felt to be incorrect.

The second is repeatedly trying such unilateral changes based on a belief in the first. The implication (in this particular case) that values were not metric originally appears to be at odds with what the page history shows. The units were (seemingly quite properly and appropriately) stated in metric for several years before an editor adjusted[3] them to add |disp=flip. This has now happened a second time; and I presume is being done based on a (misguided) belief in the status of the first issue.

Could I respectfully ask that you go through the proper channels and get a mandate before doing further similar changes. Thank you for your contributions and edits in general. —Sladen (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Does this make sense to you? —Sladen (talk) 12:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I didn't realise you expected a reply. In your original post, you directed me to

WP:UNITS#Other articles, and quoted "the main unit is generally a metric unit". But you don't quote the text which follows: "but imperial units are still used as the main units in some contexts, including: miles,". The text in question therefore should have miles as the main unit. --Redrose64 (talk

) 12:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

What it says (just before the item you have chose to quote) is in "in some contexts" … clarified with a long footnote on the subject … "If there is disagreement about the main units used in a UK-related article, discuss the matter on the article talk-page, at MOSNUM talk, or both. If consensus cannot be reached, refer to historically stable versions of the article and retain the units used". AFAIK you've (a) not done that; (b) claimed something which is not the case in the edit summary as justification; (c) continued to make further changes on the same assumed basis; (d) gone back to the same article(s) several months later and done it again; (e) claimed that it was always like this when the page history shows otherwise [and it was somebody using your account who changed it earlier].

Given your general good levels of engagement and responsiveness in meta activities on Wikipedia, I'm not understanding why this is happening in the case of units adjusting/meddling in article space and taking the points on-board when they are raised. —Sladen (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Regarding (c) "continued to make further changes on the same assumed basis" and (d) "gone back to the same article(s) several months later and done it again" - what articles have I done this on? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:32, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Diffs above: East Midlands Parkway railway station [4] [5]. —Sladen (talk) 13:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I saw those diffs. But you stated "continued to make further changes on the same assumed basis". A second edit is not "continued", so you cannot be thinking solely of East Midlands Parkway railway station, where of the 11 edits that I have made (this being the first), only two - the two you have mentioned - concern the order of measurement units. I am not the only editor to have placed the imperial unit first. The following edits placed the imperial unit first:

• 21:16, 27 January 2009; 21:08, 29 April 2012; 14:05, 30 April 2012; 10:46, 24 January 2013 - please observe that the first two of these edits were not mine.

For balance, the following edits changed the order back to metric first:

• 21:40, 27 January 2009; 11:00, 30 April 2012 (note here that the |disp=flip parameter was not undocumented - here's the doc page from that time); 05:25, 24 January 2013; 15:04, 24 January 2013.

One edit did not change the order, although it did affect the displayed conversion:

• 13:16, 13 February 2009.

Given that I changed the order just twice, the second of which restored a situation that had persisted for nine months without complaint, I hold that I have not "continued to make further changes on the same assumed basis". --Redrose64 (talk) 14:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply and the effort you have put into it. I would like to take some time to digest it. —Sladen (talk) 10:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

railroads and advice
Thank you for quality articles on

Hawkhurst Branch Line, for counseling and advice, for pointing out an overlooked problem, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! You deserve a red rose, but now you get a blue sapphire

.

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 12:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Butt P88 lists only East Minster-on-sea.

"Complete Atlas of Railway Station Names", which I had found always agreed with Butt when I had done any cross checking, surprised me by showing "East Minster on sea (East Minster)". Explanatory note in the book says that the first name given is the last name used, and previous names are shown in round brackets in reverse order, with the earliest name used shown last.

Implication is that East Minster on sea is the sole or final name and by convention is the WP article name.

Do you have any sources that can confirm the correct name for the WP article?

Efficacy (talk) 20:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Butt (p.88) gives only one name, "East Minster-on-Sea".

• McCarthy, Colin; McCarthy, David (2007). Waller, Peter (ed.). Railways of Britain: Kent and Sussex. Hersham:
  ISBN 978-0-7110-3222-4. 0710/C1. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help
  )

McCarthy & Mc Carthy (map 4 section E1 and map 5 section A1) also show one name, "East Minster-on-Sea". --Redrose64 (talk) 20:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I noticed your edit summary - I'll stop there before making further errors. I've been away from Wikipedia for a long while and I'm clearly quite rusty.

I must get round to improving some of these Metrolink station articles at some point though. Subject to Manchester Metrolink getting to GA status, I'm thinking of picking one, bringing it up to a high standard, and then using it as an example for others to follow.... well it's a pipe dream for now... --Jza84 |  Talk  21:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, taking them in the order of my edit summary (or, if you prefer, the reverse of the order in the infobox):

|coord_region= is for the ISO 3166-2:GB code of the metropolitan borough. Those codes relevant to Manchester Metrolink stops now open or under construction are: GB-BUR Bury; GB-MAN Manchester; GB-OLD Oldham; GB-RCH Rochdale; GB-SLF Salford; GB-TAM Tameside; GB-TRF Trafford. If omitted (or left blank), it's treated as |coord_region=GB.

|label_position= sets the position of label for the red dot. It has four possible values - bottom, left, right, top; when blank (or omitted), it's treated as |label_position=bottom. It's only really necessary if the label is difficult to read because it lies over some dense or dark detail. |label_position=top works as documented when the name of the tram stop has one word (as with Milnrow) but when there are two or more words (as with South Chadderton or Kingsway Business Park), the wrapping between the words causes the second and third words to lie on top of the red dot, which is always worse than having all the words below. I try to avoid using |label_position=left because browsers are inconsistent with that one, which really only leaves |label_position=right available for multi-word stops when the default is unsuitable. My normal technique is to leave |label_position= blank, preview it; and if the label is difficult to read, I set |label_position= to either top or right depending on number of words. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

That makes a little more sense. I may give it a whirl on some of the East Manchester Line articles, given 8 of the line's stations are to open in just over a week's time. Thanks for taking time out to get me back on track (if you can excuse the pun!)... --Jza84 |  Talk  23:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you you for restoring the images on all the entries for the individual members of Fairport Convention. I uploaded the ones that were, and was even given permission to do so by the photographer. I forwarded the e-mail in which he gave me permission to use them, but wikipedia wouldn't believe me and tagged for deletion, at which point I gave up hope and just accepted the inevitable. I came on here today to see if they had gone, and if they had I was going to restore the images but I see you have beaten me to it, so thank you it saved me a job. It still doesn't change the fact that those images are quite dated and need updating, but I'll leave that to someone else. Fonzleclay :D 22:12, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Fairport have played Didcot Cornerstone every April or May since it opened in September 2008... I must try and get pics next time they're here. Photography within the auditorium is forbidden by the management, but luckily, four of the band (GC excepted) are easy to nab after the performance, sometimes before or in the interval. Peggy's easiest: he'll be outside at the front, smoking. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm finishing up Genesis of the Daleks (having used information from the DVD), and I didn't know if you had any references books with more information. I was particularly looking for average viewership, since listing the ratings for the individual parts were tedious. Thanks! Glimmer721 ^talk 19:45, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Somebody reverted all your edits w/o expln. I reverted them. Anyway,

• ISBN 0-426-20369-0
  .

shows that UK viewing figures for each episode were 10.7, 10.5, 8.5, 8.8, 9.8 & 9.1 million; the 86-minute compilation (27 Dec 1975) got 7.6 million; the split of that (26 Jul 1982, 2 Aug 1982) got 4.9 & 5.0 million. On p. 247 is a list of the top ten and bottom ten TB stories by average viewers; GotD isn't listed so is in the middle 21; I thus don't have an average figure, unless we commit an offence under

WP:NOR and say 9.5666666666667. -Redrose64 (talk

) 20:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not sure if I should put the repeats under "broadcast" or "legacy" (the thought behind the latter was that it contributed to it becoming popular). Do you have a source for the AI figures? I'm also not sure which DWM issues the polls were in, aside from the 200 one. Glimmer721 ^talk 22:41, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out, have a kitten :)

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:09, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you; my own cat died almost ten years ago. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Not "comprised of", please! Try "comprising". Or "consisting of". Or, in this case, perhaps just "with". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winstonsmith99 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, it is not common practice to check edit summaries for errors of grammar or spelling. It is common practice to fix problems of page layout as and when they are located.

I could have put a link to

Wikipedia:Please sign your posts on talk pages. --Redrose64 (talk

) 12:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Redrose, you look like the guru for Template:Inflation. So, I was wondering if you could pop over to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Robinson Brown/archive1 where there is a question about inflation amounts as used in the article here (raw text in this section). The amount in question is £2727 in 1918 pounds sterling. The template (if I used it correctly) gave me £98,463 for today's value, but I did a manual crunch and got $104,000 at Measuring worth itself for 2010. So, you appear to be the template expert, can you maybe check my work and let the FAC reviewers (and me) know if we need to fix something? Many thanks in advance! Montanabw^(talk) 22:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know; probably best to post at Template talk:Inflation. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

One thing I have found out is that for UK inflation, it has no figures later than 2009, so for subsequent years, it uses the 2009 data. Here are some conversion factors for 1918:

• to 2007: 35.11170212766
• to 2008: 36.505319148936
• to 2009: 36.318009118541
• to 2010: 37.993920972644
• to 2011: 39.97226443769
• to 2012: 41.246200607903
• to 2024: 51.825227963526

So, if instead of 2010, we feed 2009 into Measuring worth, we see "£99,000.00 using the retail price index" which is somewhat closer to £98,463. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

That explains it. Consensus over there is that I probably need to just use measuring worth directly. May be the best for now. Montanabw^(talk) 23:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at some of the comments Here.Kitchen Knife (talk) 00:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I removed it because you have put false passenger numbers up at Johnstone Railway Station. It only handes 1:100 per year and your saying that 1.217 use it. Its all wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.218.83.217 (talk) 12:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

That was not an excuse to remove almost all of the page content. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Will you please stop putting in false info into Johnstone stations passenger numbers, You are a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.218.83.217 (talk) 13:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

See section above, also your talk page. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

On the

We need to consider the name carefully: at one time there were three routes from Manchester to Bury. The first was the Manchester, Bury and Rossendale Railway (renamed East Lancashire Railway in 1845) which opened in 1846; this was closely followed by the extension of the Manchester and Leeds Railway from Heywood (which formed an end-on junction at Bury with the Liverpool and Bury Railway), which opened in 1848. M&LR trains to Bury ran from Victoria via Middleton Junction and Heywood, but for many years the best trains to Bury were the Accrington/Burnley/Skipton services that ran via Clifton Junction, so in some books you'll find that "Bury line" refers to that route. The route from Victoria out through Crumpsall and under Heaton Park is comparatively new, having opened in 1879.

It's only since the closure of the line via Clifton Junction in 1966 that the third route has been thought of as the "Bury line". I expect that's the one which you are thinking of. The construction and opening of this route is covered as "Cheetham Hill-Radcliffe" in

• ISBN 0-7153-4906-6. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help
  )

and the electrification of the same route is covered as "Manchester-Bury-Holcombe Brook" in Marshall (1970, pp. 169–178). I suspect that the reason that it doesn't have its own article is because it's been part of Manchester Metrolink since before Wikipedia was invented. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

If you counted the threads there were six excluding the new one. I know all about archival. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 00:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

• Apologies for asking a slightly inane question, but how do I get my old signatures to update so they look the same as my new one? Lukeno94 (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

It's probably easiest to leave them alone. Otherwise you'll be going off down about 600 talk pages and the like amending pages for little benefit. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

• I was hoping there was a way I could make them automatically update... ah well, thanks anyway. :) Lukeno94 (talk) 08:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I applied what did you say on Bride talkpage, but again the following error occured:

File "watchalltest.py", line 112, in <module>
    report_text = report_template % (current_of, '\n'.join(output), ns_count_tcol, ns_count_r_tcol, ns_count_gtotal)
TypeError: %d format: a number is required, not str

Now what should we do? Thanks for your valuable help.

Please can we keep this at User talk:MZMcBride#nscounts.py. It's difficult to follow split threads. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Please have a look at

I see that it's been resolved in favour of

Asansol railway station. Judging by the signs "Asansol Station" clearly visible on the station building, and the absence of the word "Junction", I would agree with this resolution. --Redrose64 (talk

) 11:16, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and cheers. - Chandan Guha (talk) 11:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Just commented! WhisperToMe (talk) 18:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello and good evening. We are updating the page, as the album is about to be issued in the USA. I am struggling to add the current album cover. I have deleted the old one (which was sold out and deleted over 3 years ago) and I made a a couple of minor ammendments. 'The Whorl' was never officially released, that is placed into general distribution. A record shop could not buy a copy to resell, the general clue to an official release or not.

John Gillies is the lead singer of Yorkshire band The Conspirators, who have had a top 10 official indie chart single, so I would suggest that link would be valid? Otherwise would you kindly add the current cover into the album info box, and further down, googling judy dyble talkinh with strangers on page 1 gives a nice photo of the current vinyl with the sleeve and the inner sleeve shown.

We would be most grateful. I have always struggled with photo's on wiki!

Best wishes,

Jon (For Judy Dyble) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.251.209 (talk) 22:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I cannot add an image to any article without it first being uploaded. Please see Help:Files.

If you have ideas for amending an article, it's best to put them on the

talk page for the article concerned - such as Talk:Talking with Strangers

.

Regarding "The Whorl": I definitely got mine in a mainstream record shop; specifically, The HMV Shop, 79 Northbrook Street, Newbury RG14 1AE. I paid £15.00 on 29 January 2007, and I'm pretty sure I've got the receipt somewhere. I have a note that it was received into the shop on 23 January 2007 - as I recall, it wasn't on the shelf as a stock item but HMV were willing to order it through their usual channels. All I needed to tell them was Talking Elephant TECD 094. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello ..

may you please take a look at football records in spain ,this page is containing various different records in Spanish football, the user : 49.244.108.56 keeps removing some of them because he believes they are not needed and if you took a look at what he adds or removes you can see he is doing that biasing since he is working hard to remove Barca records allowing only real records !! the 3 records i added are well referenced from the related club website and even classified clearly under national records even not just a club records !! so anything clearer than that even ?? how should someone opinion or even bunch of people opinion about it make a difference in that ?? its a clear case...the related club classified it as record , so if someone likes it or not it shouldn't stop being a record .

and since its referenced I can't see any reason to remove it .

the website : http://www.fcbarcelona.com/club/the-honours/detail/card/fc-barcelona-team-records

what is really weird...there is some records similar to those added ( like i added ) but he added them related to Real Madrid so obviously he doesn't have a clear measure in that.\

I tried sending other for help also but i found no response so far, I just think the whole thing is turning into a circus as that :) and for the protection of integrity of wikipedia someone should act in someway !! making it clear (neither way i dont care ) just don't leave it for somenoe to decide oh i hate this club so i dont want his records and im making my hard to remove them and bringing everyother possible records for the club i like ??! take a look at it please because this IP : 49.244.108.56 has long history of doing that !

he is the same range of ip from 49.244.125.32 also he is the same as 49.244.161.201 and by the way it's all belongs to a user has been blocked before but i dont know why they unblocked him again ! it's just as a circus as that

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3878:81E0:A0A2:1EFE:E57C:DD88 (talk) 17:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

The place to discuss the content of the article is

WP:MULTI. --Redrose64 (talk

) 17:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64. You have new messages at Template talk:Country data Saskatchewan#Renamed files.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thank you for being so accommodating and quick in your response. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:49, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Redrose? (shh) You have a secret message waiting for you on Paine's talk page. – PAINE ELLSWORTH ^{C L I M A X !} 20:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if one of your sources had the AI figures for Genesis of the Daleks. I used the Shannon Sullivan site, which came into question at GAN, and while that would probably be okay a backup source would be better. Thanks, Glimmer721 ^talk 00:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

See #Genesis of the Daleks above. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

In our continuing celebrations of this 50th anniversary year I thought pass these links on for your enjoyment. First is this print [6] by Al Hirschfeld. Copies of this were available for a short period of time back in the late 80s or early 90s. Sadly my budget didn't stretch to it at the time. Next is this gem [7]. If you zoom in on some of the pics you'll see Leela and Bessie among many others. The Master seems to be a mix of Delgado - mostly - and Ainley - the costume. I did get to play it once. Unfortunately, it was on a business trip to Minneapolis so I didn't get enough time to get used to the way it combined any Dr Who storylines with its gameplay. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:William C. Rader § Moved from User talk:Redrose64

 – My talk page is not the place to argue your case. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I responded on my talk page. Thanks!--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 16:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you I saw it. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello RedRose, I know you've helped me in the past so I was wondering if I could call on you again at the above link. While editing the sandbox I noticed a few duplicate and seemingly unused fields doing something similar to the field I am requesting you remove and one that is made redundant by an existing field which seems to have replaced it, so seems to be left over code which I have also removed from the sandbox version. Thanks for reading. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 09:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks RedRose. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Daybreak broadcast a special segment of ITV's "From the Heart" season live from the Emmerdale set because of McGeever's illness. Is that not a reliable enough source for you? Smurfmeister (talk) 19:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

A life-threatening illness is a serious matter. If we mention it, we must do so in a manner that is not only truthful, but verifiable and neutral. Can you give a

policy on original research? If your answer to any of those is "no", then I'm afraid that you can't. --Redrose64 (talk

) 20:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

"A life-threatening illness is a serious matter". Oh, is it? Well thank you for pointing thst out. All this time I've been sitting laughing uncontrollably over it. Silly me. Smurfmeister (talk) 11:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I was well aware of that, I just didn't want to clutter it up with unnecessary text and just went with what the station screens now say. What you've done now is better. Thanks. Tom walker (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

hi,

thanks a lot for fixing the infobox error. --Soman (talk) 15:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I know where I picked up the soft hyphen! – PAINE ELLSWORTH ^CLIMAX! 00:50, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I'll. I'm so sorry for any nuisance I caused.--Avocato (talk) 09:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't bother me - I'm just working through

Hi, thanks for help on British Rail DP2! The "half" thing will stick in my mind now :-) But as for times, BR expresses times as HH.MM, as evidenced in the primary reference for the article. Sure, the MOS may say "HH:MM", but (and this is important), the time expressed in standard BR format is a part of the name of the service. So, for example: 22.50 Edinburgh - King's Cross is the name of a service preceded by its scheduled time, but 22:50 Edinburgh – King's Cross is emphatically not, and simply lists a time, followed by the general name of a service which may have been scheduled to leave at another time. HTH! --Rfsmit (talk) 01:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I've taken this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Format of train times. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I was just poking into this, and see the problem. T47708 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadget850 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 4 March 2013‎

I've used the "Edit links" link on dozens of articles with spaces in the name, see d:Special:Contributions/Redrose64, and it's never caused a problem. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

It works because browsers use a looser spec, but technically it is invalid, thus the W3C reports the error. not a huge issue, but one of those nagging bugs that gets in the way a bit when you have real validation issues. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:56, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

And there is a patch already. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 18:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately James and I both came down with food poisoning on Sunday morning, hope it went well and should be at Oxford 4. Best, - Jarry1250 ^{[Vacation needed]} 21:18, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64. You have a message mentioning you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan's talk page. LittleBen (talk) 11:21, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Technical 13 (talk) 16:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, shoot. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

And after all that, it closed without me being mentioned once. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:53, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou very much! I really appreciate it - such a little thing, but I couldn't figure it out. All the best, Wikidea 13:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Brighton 1 wikimeet has been scheduled for 28th April. A geonotice at the end of March would be appreciated. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 01:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

It's in the queue. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Would you care to explain your reversion of my edit to

As a side, I don't mind you changing my signatures on your personal pages; however, as a preemptive note, please don't change my signature anywhere else. I have gone through and made them confirm to consensus as per

Click to learn how to view this signature as intended

) 19:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

From the time that you raised the thread to the time that you altered the wording based on "consensus" was one hour eleven minutes, at which point just three others had expressed an opinion. This is by no means sufficient to form

WP:SNOW

applies.

What is this "blunt

personal attack" to which you allude? --Redrose64 (talk

) 19:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I would appreciate to know your opinion in the case of merging {{Infobox settlement Chile}} to {{Infobox settlement}} as proposed in {{Infobox settlement/sandbox}}. The discussion is in Template_talk:Infobox_settlement#Infobox_settlement_Chile. Feel free to ask more information that isn't given in the discussion.

--Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 18:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Redrose, Sorry for late reply. Now you can login in Urdu Wikipedia. Good luck.

Thank you, I have set up a user page; now, I had a list of interlanguage links that needed fixing - I need to find that again. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

:)

talk

) 09:31, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

wiki page on Georgia is woefully dated and needs immediate updating

Edit request on 14 March 2013 This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

On October 4th 2012 a major victory was achieved by opposition forces against President Mikheil Saakashvili, and Ivanishvili's Dream Team swept into Parliament with a triumphant majority. Major institutional changes have been ongoing since this election victory. Media freedoms, abolishment of prison abuses, and higher paid health care workers, have resulted in just a few months since the turnover of the government to the new administration.

Popeadrian (talk) 09:18, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for communicating with the user Popeadrian (talk · contribs). Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Popeadrian (talk) 13:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I presume that you have a problem with the article

talk page, which is Talk:Georgia (country). --Redrose64 (talk

) 13:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I left the requests there just moments before. Should I remove them or do they need to be logged? Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 18:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

To be safe, I've signed them off. That way, if there are any complaints, they know to come to me. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:21, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Cheers. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 18:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

{{Talkback|Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)|Looking for a table guru...|ts=by Theopolisme at 14:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)}}

I'm not at all sure you're right about the train livery being derived from the colour of the biscuit when divided. I shall have to carry out extensive research to verify this issue. I'm just opening the packet now: this could take some time. Britmax (talk) 15:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

You do know there is a debate as to whether the Jaffa Cake is a biscuit! Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 17:31, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I saw something like "(don't go there)" in an edit summary today. It's a crucial question, because in some parts of the EU, cakes and biscuits are taxed differently. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:33, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

That's great, as now I can admit you were right while carrying on my essential research. Britmax (talk) 18:12, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Much as though I agree with your technical point of history that all of the stations on the

I made four reverts - two each to two different articles. Of these four, one was a partial revert; but for each article, the two reverts were not the same. One was an infobox parameter, the other was a category, over fifteen hours later. Therefore my reverts were neither continual nor repetitive.

The two stations in question (Annfield Plain and West Stanley) are not even on the Stanhope & Tyne; they are on deviation lines built by the NER in the 1880s and 1890s. As you well know, the S&T had long since ceased to exist as a separate company some decades earlier.

Why should Co. Durham be any different to the rest of the country? Throughout the rest of the UK it is the practice that the |original= holds the name of the company which opened the station - i.e. the station's original company - and that the "Former xxx stations" category either matches the |original= where there are sufficient articles to justify a category, or where there are not, the "Former xxx stations" category is that of a successor company.

I have invited

Lamberhurst (talk · contribs), being directly named by yourself, to comment. --Redrose64 (talk

) 09:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I should apologise if my approach to the template has given rise to problems. Not being (by any means) an expert on County Durham, I took out my

Lamberhurst (talk

) 12:37, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou, now in the case of stations like Annfield Plain and West Stanley - see page history - there are now three areas of contention (the third being the routebox), so which way should it lie? --Redrose64 (talk) 12:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I've now modified the infobox to show the Annfield stations separately. Other issues: (1) the Annfield stations should be within the former NER stations category, as that was the company which opened them; and (2) the routeboxes for those stations should show "Annfield Diversion" as the line but in the absence of an article, it could be piped to S&T. Anything else?

Lamberhurst (talk

) 20:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I just added talk pages and one category to your Category:Railway services by year of introduction. Besides that, I added one other line to one of your categories. Keep 'em coming. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, you mean Category:Railway services introduced in 1973 and this edit? Fine, that's the idea. I had found that these articles were indiscriminately in "19xx introductions" or "19xx in rail transport", so my first object was to put them all into both - I quickly realised that a category structure was the most efficient means. Then I intend to go through categories like Category:Named passenger trains of the United States and pop the relevant "Railway services introduced in 19xx" into each article. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Good, because I just created three others as well. I can do more, but I have to go someplace in real life and wait until I come back home. So if you don't beat me to the ones I'm thinking of doing, I'll just try for some others when I get home. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

see here if you have a chance. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

fixed, so you can ignore this message. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 18:02, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

These are not appearing in the banner yet. Are they still in the queue? Thanks Philafrenzy (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, see meta:User:Redrose64, but both are more than four weeks off. There were complaints last August/September about some geonotices going up too early. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

OK. There is also a Glasgow 1 in May. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Queued]. I'll promote Brighton to MediaWiki:Geonotice.js this Sunday, Oxford next Sunday, and Glasgow the Sunday after.

Have a look at meta:Meetup/Nottingham/1. There's something funny going on there; it seems to be an attempt to set up a cross-project redirect, but they don't work. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Merseyrail, Tyne and Wear Metro".

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 18:53, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	For taking time to correctly resolve an issue that was created by poor creation of a family of templates compounded by poor communication of an administrator to a relatively new editor on this wiki. These things are appreciated and help restore the faith of editors in administrators as a whole. Thank You. — View signature as intended ) 16:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 16:48, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I note your reversal of my edit in January, and can clearly see why you did it. Surely though to the layman Lime Street is the final stop of this line and is the terminus? I can't fathom putting it in order of the final train that doesn't make sense. It's not that important just an observation. Babydoll9799 (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, but that's the point: Liverpool Lime Street isn't the final stop. Having arrived there from Blackpool, the train reverses and then continues to Liverpool South Parkway, where it terminates. See Table 90, page 12, where several trains - such as the 09:04 from Preston and the 09:37 from Blackpool North - are given the footnote marker J, which means "To Liverpool South Parkway". Similarly on page 2 of the same timetable, where several trains - such as the 10:57 and 11:57 from Liverpool Lime Street - are given the footnote marker B, which means "From Liverpool South Parkway". The portion between Liverpool Lime Street and Liverpool South Parkway is shown on Table 91. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

what to write for indian railways wikiproject? please tell me as u have just answered me.

also can u tell me why 1- for wikiproject mumbai i have to write {{User wikiProject Mumbai}}?

2- for wikiproject Trains i have to write {{User Trains wikiproject}}? why not

This user is a participant in the Trains WikiProject.

did not work?

I don't know of a userbox for WikiProject Indian railways.

The userboxes are templates, and template names are like article names - they must be entered exactly right: the order of the words is just as important as the spelling and capitalisation. If you get them wrong, you probably won't get the template at all, but a redlink - as in all of your examples above. Please note the correct forms: {{

User Trains WikiProject}} --Redrose64 (talk

) 20:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Wiki has become as sort of joke. If you mention anything from wiki people laugh. I have written about 1/4 quarter of the Merseyrail article over time (it was a joke at one stage) and attempted to spruce up the rest without distorting content. Wiki is not a buddies club. 94.194.21.227 (talk) 09:58, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

and this is the wrong place to discuss the article

WP:NPA. --Redrose64 (talk

) 10:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

You told me to take it here in a PM.94.194.21.227 (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

When? What is a PM? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Their talk page warning. Btw, PM means Personal Message\Private Message. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 13:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh. Well, I still think that issues affecting Merseyrail should be discussed at Talk:Merseyrail. We also have a thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#The difference between commuter rail and metro\rapid transit and I don't see any need for a third. But going round making statements like "if you are arguing for x you must be an employee of y", without a shred of evidence; or calling other users "dumb" or "unable to write" is just not on. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:46, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

How are you going stop nutballs? Some are quite dumb and clearly cannot write but insist on getting their way. One on the Merseyrail article is obsessed with a train operating company and cannot differentiate between the physical network and company. Fact is fact. It is like reading a 10 year old at times. I know a rail worker when he writes - full of rail buff language.188.223.113.80 (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, so this was you, then. I did wonder. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Should BigScribe be informed about the investigation? Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 20:17, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

You mean this? That's really down to Lukeno94 (talk · contribs) who filed it; but sometimes it's intentional that the suspected sock isn't notified. I don't know if that's the case here. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

		The Railways Barnstar
		Thought I'd be the latest to award this, for your tireless work on this subject area. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:22, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - but it's not the first, see User:Redrose64#Awards. I think that there's another, somewhere in my talkpage archives, that I forgot to move over. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

• Gah, I'll change the message to suit then :P Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)