Misplaced Pages

Here is a tricky one

Tonight I found two "Portal animation" items and a list in AussieLegend's works space in the category. The one thing they had in common was copies from The Simpsons articles on the page. I did some digging and couldn't find a protection template that would cause this problem. As I worked on other pages that were in the incorrect PP cat this essay Misplaced Pages:Fancruft was also listed but its last protection was almost a decade ago. I then found a big red warning message near the bottom of the page that mentions The Simpsons. Is this red warning connected to the other pages being on the list somehow? Pinging Paine as well in hopes that either or both of you can figure out what is going on. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 04:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

It concerns {{The Simpsons episode count}}, attempts to orphan that and hence give an excuse to delete it, see Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 24#Template:The Simpsons episode count. In my view, transcluding an entire article (The Simpsons) by means of the markup {{:The Simpsons}} just to extract one figure is hugely inefficient. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks R. I am glad that you were able to track down what was happening. MarnetteD|Talk 16:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

A new one that I cannot access

Hello R. Talk:Mercedes-Benz Stadium/Archive 1 is now in the cat. As it has been fully protected so can't perform any edits to fix the situation. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:45, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I set the |expiry= parameter. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 17:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Query: Correct redirecting

Hi User:Redrose64 - I noticed that you had deleted my request to delete the redirect that is present on the Susan Foreman article and I was hoping for some advice. Currently a search for 'Susan Campbell' redirects to Susan Foreman, which I think is incorrect, as there is no obvious link to Susan Foreman. There is another article on Susan M. Campbell, which I think should be what shows up when one searches 'Susan Campbell'. Obviously I've gone about this in the wrong way, but would appreciate any guidance on how to do it properly. Thanks in advance Fbell74 (talk) 06:42, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

@Fbell74: With this edit, you put the {{db-g6}} on the article Susan Foreman, not on a redirect; it was therefore a request to delete that article under WP:CSD#G6, which does not apply in any way.

If your intention was to get a redirect deleted, criteria specific to redirs are listed at WP:CSD#Redirects, but one or more of the general CSD criteria might apply. Try to avoid using G6 - when no other criteria fit, some people try to use this as a catch-all wildcard criterion, which it isn't. {{db-move}} is a case within G6, but it's best to use that as a follow-up to a successful discussion, such as a WP:RM. I assume that you are thinking of the redirect Susan Campbell - this is a long-established redirect (8+1⁄2 years since it was created), so it would be difficult to get any CSD criterion to stick without prior discussion. I would say that your best bet is to take it to WP:RFD. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

You're right - I put the note in the wrong area. I wasn't looking to have the 'Susan Foreman' article deleted at all, only the redirect from 'Susan Campbell', which takes visitors to the 'Susan Foreman' article. I'm unsure why it was set up like that in the first place but maybe there was a reason at the time. I'll follow your suggestion and see how it goes. Thanks for taking the time to respond Fbell74 (talk) 02:19, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Redrose64 - I saw that you had closed off the request I raised because I'd submitted it in the wrong area. I couldn't reply on that page because that query is closed now, but sorry about that. I've resubmitted the request, but this time in Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion, as well as on the Talkpage of the actual page containing the redirect. Hopefully I've done it properly now. Thank you for your help with this.Fbell74 (talk) 02:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

No, you didn't do it properly. This is what you did: notice how the rendered page now shows

{{subst:rfd|content=#REDIRECT Susan Campbell

at the top - that "{{subst:" is a dead giveaway that something wasn't right; you also added an unwarranted {{R from move}} template which wasn't there before - the redirect wasn't created as a page move so that template should not have been added at all. If you had done it properly, it would look like 2018 NHL Entry Draft - notice how that has a box at the top explaining that the redirect is at RFD, that box also contains a link to the RFD discussion page. Yours did not.

The whole matter seems to have been resolved by Tavix (talk · contribs) who merely converted the redirect to a dab page, the sum of the edits being this. There was no need for any deletion. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I really didn't do it properly at all. The end result looks quite clean and makes sense in terms of directing users to the various pages they might be looking for with a search on 'Susan Campbell' Fbell74 (talk) 06:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

User:Promptsecretariat

Promptsecretariat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) Can you as an admin do something about this new user? All edits so far are racist vandalism. Admits to being anti-Jewish on user page. -- Alarics (talk) 10:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Alarics: Surely it's better to report such matters on a noticeboard, rather than the user talk page of one admin? --Redrose64 (talk) 10:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I feared you might say that. I did have a look but it's not very clear to the uninitiated which noticeboard or what exactly one is supposed to do. I asked you because I know you are familiar with these things and you have helped me out before. Do you at least agree that some action is required in this case? -- Alarics (talk) 11:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Edits to three articles, all reverted. You could inform WP:NPOVN. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Advice on warning users for unconstructive edits

Do you think the warning I gave to the user for his unconstructive edit on Radiochemistry was suitable? Thanks. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Leeds United FC fan: Yes, except that you used {{Uw-vandalism1|Radiochemistry}} where you should have used {{subst:Uw-vandalism1|Radiochemistry}} --Redrose64 (talk) 20:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll remember to use the substitution template in future. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Llanpumpsaint station on the Carmarthen to Aberystwyth line template/ line diagram

Many thanks indeed for your speedy reversion to Llanpumpsaint. Had the other name of Llanpumsaint ever appeared on that particular line diagram (which is mostly repeated on that of the Manchester and Milford Railway one) or ever appeared on any previous editions of it? I am sure that I saw the name somewhere, but now cannot recall where.

Paul Sidorczuk (talk) 07:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Paul Sidorczuk: The locality is Llanpumsaint with one "p" but the station was always Llanpumpsaint with an extra "p". I don't have any books specifically dealing with the Carmarthen and Cardigan Railway. But see for example

• Butt, R. V. J. (October 1995). The Directory of Railway Stations: details every public and private passenger station, halt, platform and stopping place, past and present (1st ed.). Sparkford: Patrick Stephens Ltd. p. 146. ISBN 978-1-85260-508-7. OCLC 60251199. OL 11956311M.
• Holden, J.S. (2007) . The Manchester & Milford Railway. The Oakwood Library of Railway History (2nd ed.). Usk: Oakwood Press. p. 60. ISBN 978-0-85361-658-0. OL50. (reproduction of GWR 1882 timetable)
• MacDermot, E.T. (1931). History of the Great Western Railway, vol. II: 1863-1921. Paddington: Great Western Railway. p. 341. OCLC 55853736. with an intermediate station at Llanpumpsaint
• Price, Martin R. Connop (1995). The Lampeter, Aberayron and New Quay Light Railway. Locomotion Papers. Headington: Oakwood Press. p. 43. ISBN 0-85361-480-6. LP191. (reproductions of two GWR posters advertising cheap tickets to Lampeter)

For the names of railway station articles, we don't use the name of the locality but the name that was actually used by the railway company, and shown on station signs and in timetables. See Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (UK stations). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Contractions are common in placenames. It's surprising that the explanation of the name in the Llanpumsaint article doesn't simply say that pump is the Welsh word for five, even though it does mention the five saints. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Paul Sidorczuk: There should be a photo of the station, including its signage, in

• Mitchell, Victor E.; Smith, Keith (February 2011). Aberystwyth to Carmarthen. Western Main Lines. Midhurst: Middleton Press. figures 57-58. ISBN 978-1-906008-90-1.

unfortunately I don't have a copy. It's available here.

@Martinevans123: Railway companies that were ostensibly Welsh often had English shareholders, directors and management. Ignorant of the Welsh language they would anglicise Welsh place names - or simply mis-spell them - without understanding the words and syllables, or the significant change in meaning that a subtle alteration - like adding one letter - can make. As Price notes in The Lampeter, Aberayron and New Quay Light Railway (p. 37) concerning the halt close to Neuaddlwyd, "Never very sensitive towards either the Welsh language or Welsh spellings, the authorities at Paddington disregarded local objections and called the new platform 'Llanerch Ayron'." It was located at 52°13′04″N 4°13′59″W / 52.2178°N 4.2331°W / 52.2178; -4.2331, and there is a nearby village Llanerchaeron. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, how things have changed! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Extra 'via' stations on Horsham station

I've just been looking at recent edits made to Horsham station by Railway56 and notice that when previous almost identical edits were being made by a user called Towns21 (who incidentally stopped editing at the same time as Railway56 started) they were reverted. Since you were involved then, are you able to help me work out if these need reverting again now? Thanks. - Shrewdoliver (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Shrewdoliver: Railway56 (talk · contribs) has done this before. When reverted, they WP:EW and include the phrase "but not excessive" in the edit summary. They simply won't be told. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Anna Bråkenhielm

@Crisco 1492: How do I qualify? All I did was two edits: add DEFAULTSORT and fix a link. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• BabbaQ added credits for you and several other editors with this edit. It appears s/he figured that was enough for credit. Afterwards said credit templates were copied over into the preparatory areas and queues. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• Must have been a mistake of mine. Sorry guys. Well, its just a credit. :)--BabbaQ (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Plots

You recemtly sent the following message to me. "Please see WP:TVPLOT "As a rough guide, summaries for episode articles should be about 200 to 500 words." Therefore, please only remove {{plot}} if it is shorter than 500 words".

First, the suggested summary length quoted is only a rough guide and not prescriptive. Second, the articles I have removed {{plot}} from are not episode articles, they are serial articles covering multiple episodes. Third, I am using WP:WikiProject Doctor Who/Manual of style as my guide. The section 'Episode pages/Plot/Synopsis' states: “A concise but legible summary of the episode written from the real-life perspective. A common length is approximately ten words per minute, however this can be lengthened in the case of a complicated plot”. So, for The Daleks' Master Plan, for instance, that’s 12 episides at 25 minutes each = 300 minutes x 10 words/minute = 3000 words. At the time of writing the plot summary for this article contains 1301 words. So on that basis it’s well within bounds, the use of {{plot}} is unjustified and that's why it has been removed from the article and others like it where similar circumstances prevail. 86.174.107.13 (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Template:Gutenberg author

Hi Redrose. I have rewritten the template in WP:Lua, seen at Module:Gutenberg - it adds a new feature, the ID can be either a name or a number (the later goes direct to the author page bypassing the search result page). The testcases page is Template:Gutenberg author/testcases where it verifies. This is a simple template with no options besides "id" and "name" so it won't break existing instances. The template is protected and I don't have permissions to edit. Since you have helped in the past, would you be able to change the template to what is currently at Template:Gutenberg author/sandbox? Replace this line:

• at ]

With this line:

• <includeonly>{{#invoke:Gutenberg|author}}</includeonly>

-- GreenC 19:04, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@Green Cardamom: Sorry, but I cannot assist in converting a template from a form which I do understand to one that I don't. As a computer programmer I feel that those who write or amend code should be responsible for its maintenance: if I carry out that edit I will be placing myself in the position of being unable to assist should any problem arise. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:01, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Umm... can you remove the protection so I can do it? Or give me the perms? I'm an experienced programmer and have written other templates. -- GreenC 23:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I opened an edit request. Since you answered the other edit request, can you help again? You are not responsible for the code, the code is my responsibility. If there is a problem with the code it is with the Lua module which I will take care of. The template page is basically just a redirect to the Lua Module:Gutenberg. But believe me, there is no problem. -- GreenC 00:49, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

em-dashes, en-dash & advisor.js

Thanks for correcting my em-dashes and en-dash (although I've never understood why this is important) I used User:Cameltrader/Advisor while fixing some reference CS1 issues. It might be worth talking to the developer/operator of that tool to stop it inserting the wrong ones (if they are wrong but as I say I can't see any difference).— Rod 20:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

On the rendered page, em-dashes (—) are normally twice as long as en-dashes (–). In the edit window, there isn't much difference, if any - it will depend upon the fonts installed on your computer. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

OK maybe its the fonts I have as I don't see any difference. I'll just not use the advisor tool and leave the error message I get from it above the edit window telling me that they need changing.— Rod 20:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Judging by comments at User talk:Cameltrader/Advisor, the script maintainer hasn't been around for some years. It's not likely to be fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Cross section of cleanup category & WikiProjects

Hey Redrose, do you know of a way to get a list of articles tagged for a category (e.g., Articles needing cleanup) within a specific WikiProject? The former is tagged on the article page and the latter is tagged on the talk page, so CatScan doesn't do an easy cross section, as far as I can tell. Open to suggestions czar 01:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I do this with Catscan. Here's a link to a search that looked within some copy-editing tracking categories for articles with a WP Biography template on their Talk page.

Remember to also check for aliases of the template that you are looking for (using What links here in your left nav bar). – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Aha, I see! Took a few tries to get it to run, but it's doing what I want. Thanks so much! czar 13:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

St Austell railway station

Just wondered if you realised that First Great Western have re-branded themselves as Great Western Railway when you reverted at St Austell railway station? Poltair (talk) 06:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Poltair: Yes, I do; what you probably didn't notice is that Merlinhst7 (talk · contribs) broke links when they edited that page, as well as introducing totally unnecessary <br> tags. I've been cleaning up after them. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:52, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Category: Assyrian (Ashuri) script

The current category should definitely stay, insofar that it is the correct term and designation for our modern Hebrew script, whereas the original script was the Paleo-Hebrew script. This is evident in all of the writings of the Mishnah and Talmud, and is well-known by those who are engaged Judaic studies.Davidbena (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Davidbena: No, the simple fact is that you put the category inside itself, and gave it no parents other than itself. This is not how we categorise categories. See WP:SUPERCAT "Category chains formed by parent–child relationships should never form closed loops; that is, no category should be contained as a subcategory of one of its own subcategories." --Redrose64 (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

So, the parent category should be "Semitic languages."Davidbena (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

It's not a category for a language, but a category for a script or writing system: therefore at least one of its parent categories should be a broader category for scripts or writing systems. See for example Category:Arabic script which has five parent categories, amongst these are Category:Abjad writing systems, Category:Semitic writing systems and Category:Writing systems derived from the Phoenician. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

The best choice would be the parent category, Category:Semitic writing systems. Good luck!Davidbena (talk) 00:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Bournemouth station

Hi, thanks for pointing out that error in the image caption box, I don't know what I did, but obviously didn't finish writing what I wanted to write! Jack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellminsterboy (talk • contribs) 09:12, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Birmingham meetup

@Yaris678: Replied with this post. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:22, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Ronny Lee

"first name spelled with 'y', not 'ie', on the end": Thanks, I have now italicized it, since writing "Ronnie Lee" instead of "Ronny Lee" is an error that even some of the referenced articles about him made (and he didn't like it, because "Ronnie" usually used to be short for "Veronica").

"Years" in "Early years" section header: Thanks, I have now done the same for "Later years" section header.

"D'Angelico": I have now put back the link in "D'Angelico guitar", but intentionally made it to D'Angelico--not to D'Angelico Guitars--since RL's guitar was made before 1964 (1927 + 14 = 1941) and that article more-accurately describes its features.

"Unpreparing for War" in Daugherty ref.: I have now put the phrase in single quotes, since you don't like double-quotes in ref. title--but they are double-quotes in title of Daugherty's paper.

"" to " ": Thanks, I didn't know that existed.

DovidBenAvraham (talk) 11:39, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 07:45, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Redlinks

Ah, dammit. I usually catch those myself when they happen - I don't know how I missed those.

I'll fix them right away; thanks for bringing them to my attention. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 23:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Taken care of. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Image

Hi. I have been trying to make the infobox image on Harry Potter and the Cursed Child‎ appear larger, but don't seem to be able to. Is there something I'm missing. Maybe its not possible.Blethering Scot 21:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

{{Infobox play}} doesn't recognise |image_size=, nor is there any equivalent. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

damn thats really annoying. Image doesn't display properly at that size. I see it was removed here, but i dont see consensus for it on the talk page of the template. Do u know if discussions were held elsewhere.Blethering Scot 13:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Have you asked Alakzi (talk · contribs) why that change was made? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I will ping him on template talk page. Someone else has asked the same question.Blethering Scot 21:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Could u do me a favour. Could u look at the template talk page and explain to me what he means by you can change image size by using |image_upright= . I just am not getting how I can use that peramater to increase size.Blethering Scot 19:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Replied at Template talk:Infobox play#Image size option. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Beats of Rage -Protection Request

Please, protect Beats of Rage from anonymous users because uncontrolled editwar of the mad 31.173.243.24 and it's offsprings (I am the Recent changes patroller and I've caught that IP by the tail, but I can't block it)! I am suffering from his vandalistic edits. Natsume96 (talk) 12:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

@Natsume96: requests for increases to a page protection level should be made at Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Hello Redrose64:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Misplaced Pages, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 20:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Bristol Temple Meads railway station

Hi Redrose64, thanks for correcting my image placement, this is my first day on Misplaced Pages! BristolIcarus (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Oxford - Marylebone

I had just realised that I had gotten ahead of reality and had begun to repair the damage. Sorry if I've wasted your time. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:09, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: I'm at Oxford station most weeks, last visit was Thurs 29 Oct, next is Tues 3 Nov. The replacement bus service is still running but instead of being Oxford to Islip and Bicester, it's now Oxford to Oxford Parkway. The proposed lengthening of platform 3 (and the conversion of the parcels dock to passenger plat) has not yet commenced. Engineers are still working on the track from Oxford North Junction northwards. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I can partly blame sloppy reporting in the media but I really ought to have asked questions first and shot second.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Bicester - Bletchley

Hi Redrose, have you seen East West Rail delivery could be delayed by seven years (rail technology magazine, 03.11.15). Any idea what the proposed rephrasing is? It talks about 'phase 2' being Bicester - Bedford, but we already know that electrification of Bletchley - Bedford is 'planned but not scheduled', so it's hardly that. What we really need to know is this - is Bicester - Bletchley now 'phase 2a' and Risboro' - Aylesbury - Claydon Jn now 'phase 2b'? Or something else? Whether or which, we need a source that is less vague than this to qualify as a citeable wp:rs. Expletive deleted journalists --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:51, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I shot an innocent bystander again. Rail Technology was just reprinting this press release from the East West Rail consortium. Perhaps they have political reasons to conflate Bicester - Bletchley with Bletchley - Bedford? Was it ever likely that these two sub-projects would go ahead in parallel rather than sequentially? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Reversions

Disrupting Misplaced Pages

Please note you have made the same reversion to this article at least 5 times in a row now, over the last few days, despite there being ongoing discussion. If you continue to do this you will be banned from editing Misplaced Pages. --Rebroad (talk) 13:17, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

What is "this article"? Please state which one you have in mind. If you don't like what I do, you are free to take me to WP:ANI. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:24, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

You know full well which article I am referring to - the one we are currently talking about. But, if it pleases you:-

Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Double jeopardy, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Misplaced Pages, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Rebroad (talk) 15:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Rebroad: At first that was the article that I assumed that you meant. But I looked at its history, and found that I had made four edits in a week, not "at least 5 times in a row now, over the last few days". To get the count up to 5, we need to go back to 23 September 2015‎, where I restored two templates that were apparently removed inadvertently by Sc0187 (talk · contribs) in this series of edits. As for "ongoing discussion", the only one that I am aware of is on your talk page, so you are just as aware of it as I am, so I could call you on WP:EW for four edits to Double jeopardy in well under two hours, every single one of which was a revert. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Whitby Railway Station

Hi Redrose64 - Just seen that I left York off the list for the Tile Maps on Whitby Railway Station (D'Oh). Thanks for putting it right. How could I even forget York....? The joy of all things (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I spotted it was missing because the one at York is about the only one that I've actually seen in the flesh - something like 30 years ago, it reminded me of the tiled map at Manchester Victoria. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I fail to see the problem.

Mr Rose, you recently removed something on the wikipedia page, star trek generations 1997 video game.

I find it annoying that I should find out some behind the scenes information only to have it removed because of a link?! A link that actually illustrates a point. Forgive me but I thought wikipedia was a free source of information, and a lot of people like to read behind the scenes information about things.

Sorry for trying to post information. Maybe next time I just won't bother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.235.146.15 (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean Star Trek Generations (video game)? I have never touched that page: my name does not appear in the revision history. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Move redirect text

Please undo this edit to MediaWiki:Move-redirect-text, as pages in the MediaWiki namespace should not be edited without consensus. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: Why are you asking me, and not Mr. Stradivarius (talk · contribs)? --Redrose64 (talk) 09:07, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: I've reverted it, seeing as this is the second request for me to do so. Also pinging Paine Ellsworth, as they are the user I've most often seen using {{redr}} in this way. Personally I think that using redr here is a good idea, but Geoffrey is probably right that this needs a wider consensus than just "what I've seen Paine doing". — Mr. Stradivarius 16:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Just an FYI

Just a heads up...I noticed you adding "class=c |importance=" to many "WikiProject Women" templates. That's fine, but I didn't want you to do excess work for nothing. Someone recently went around tagging all the tennis pages with "WikiProject Women" template and they shouldn't have. Per a discussion with that wikiproject, they only tag women's articles with "WikiProject Women" IF there aren't already templates for "WikiProject Women's sport" or "WikiProject Women's History." So many of those templates you are adding to are being removed anyway. I just didn't want you wasting time and effort. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:28, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): Do you mean this thread, which I initiated? It seems inconclusive to me. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

No, that was a later thread. One that I started earlier here. Where it was said "Our policy has been that if the page has one of the umbrella tags on it, others aren't necessary." Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

That one also seems inconclusive. If it hadn't been, my thread wouldn't have been necessary, or the replies to it would have pointed out an earlier consensus. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Request re. persistent wholesale copyvios at Stirling Moss

Greetings. You contributed at the Stirling Moss BLP in the not too distant past, so you may already be fairly familiar with it. Would you be willing to take a look at the recent massive WP:COPYVIO cutting a pasting by LordAnon of Essex? Yesterday I restored the article to its pre-copyvio state (noted on the article talk page) and left a warning on the talk page of the user User_talk:LordAnon_of_Essex#Copyright_violations_at_the_Stirling_Moss_article, who has been warned several times in the past for cut-and-paste copyvios on several other articles. The user either hasn’t seen the warnings or has chosen to ignore them—and simply continues with copyvio edits. I posted a second warning to their talk page,User_talk:LordAnon_of_Essex#Persistent_reinsertion_of_copyright_violations_at_the_Stirling_Moss_article and again posted to the article talk page noting the resumption of copyvios. The user’s talk page shows a warning by administrator Garion96 as long ago as February 2013 that they would be blocked if the practice continued.User_talk:LordAnon_of_Essex#Copyright_violations Nevertheless it has continued. I have pinged Garion96, whose contribs history shows only very sporadic contributions, with nothing since October 24. I have also notified WikiProject Formula One Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One#FYI:_copyvios_at_Stirling_Moss. The scale and persistence of the violations are such that I think it might be time the user received attention from an administrator. Writegeist (talk) 20:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

@Writegeist: My only recent contributions to Stirling Moss concerned unsuitable links for OBE added by a user who was making similar poor edits on a variety of articles. I'm not a copyright expert - per WP:DCV, this is really a matter for WP:ANI. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:15, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the reply. But the ANI cesspit? No thanks! I never drag anyone there. Screw it, I'll just let it go. I mean, who cares, right? It's only some writer's work being used without permission. Writegeist (talk) 22:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

So ask a copyright expert --Redrose64 (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the well-intentioned advice but rather than search for a "copyright expert" it's simpler and more straightforward for me to let the relevant authors and publishers know. Writegeist (talk) 01:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Marie Serneholt

If you want to, please take a look at the article about Marie Serneholt, which is this weeks selected TAFI article. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 16:17, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

NEWSECTIONLINK and INDEX magic words

What are these magic words for? VE likes to add them to the end of pages, such as Anye Elite or Ammunition. Bgwhite (talk) 23:01, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: I guess you mean this edit and this one (I reverted both). See H:MW#Behavior switches. Neither is useful: articles are indexed by default so __INDEX__ is redundant; and articles are not discussion pages, so shouldn't have a "new section" tab. I don't get involved with VE; indeed, I refuse to use it - have you informed WP:VEF? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't sure what NEWSECTIONLINK did. Yea, I get to add yet another phabricator ticket that will be ignored. There are ~40 articles with NEWSECTIONLINK in the last dump. Content Transcrapulator is worse than VE, but isn't used as much. You are lucky, I get to cleanup up all the crap VE leaves behind. The latest is when a quote is left off a ref name (ie <ref name="ref>), VE craps out. They are not going to fix it in VE, but instead they want CheckWiki to look for it so us peons can fix it. Bgwhite (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

WP:VEF is in Misplaced Pages, it's not a phab: page. If you don't want to post there, you could complain to Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk · contribs) directly. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Posted at T118796. Whatamidoing (WMF) is aware of my frustrations and I've already vented to them about tickets being ignored. I'm now wasting ~2 hours a day just fixing VE issues and getting burnt out. Bgwhite (talk) 00:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: Do you have any evidence, like own experience or claims from the editors, that VE does this on its own? If you edit with VE then the top right has a page options icon with three horizontal lines. "Advanced settings" on that menu has "Let this page be indexed by search engines" and "Show a tab on this page to add a new section". Enabling these will make exactly the edit in the above diffs, placing the magic words at the bottom of the page. The meny has a third option "Enable display title" which will add {{DISPLAYTITLE:label}} at the top like this one if the user enters "label" in a box. I suspect it's just users not knowing what they do, like all the empty <ref></ref> new users make with the source editor button below the edit box. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Why does VE even allow one to do this in articles? Neither of these options need to be set in articles. That is a bug, not a feature. If users are adding <ref></ref>, why is VE letting them do that? Egads, this is going to be another "need to educate the user" issue that Whatamidoing (WMF) said for VE adding a ton of <span lang=> tags everywhere and you said about the ref tags. I thought VE was designed for new users in mind in which they didn't have to take a course to use VE. Bgwhite (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: Empty <ref></ref> are not added with VE but with the normal source editor. It could be confusing if VE options depend on the properties of the namespace the page is currently in. It could for example be a draft with plans to move to another namespace, or a test of VE features, or editors could be preparing for a planned change of properties in the namespace. I'm not a VE developer or user. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

There will always be people who play "what does this button do?" The thing to do is to ensure that the easily-pressed buttons are those that have a commonplace useful purpose. Adding __NEWSECTIONLINK__ is only useful on pages outside talk spaces where discussion is normal, like the Village Pumps (where it's already present); and adding __INDEX__ is almost never necessary. Those people who need to add or remove __NEWSECTIONLINK__ and __INDEX__ will almost certainly be people with plenty of experience, people who simply do not need VE. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:30, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Bgwhite: Hopefully you're not refering to my request to see if this could be added to CheckWiki. Looking again at my request, I see I didn't specify that I suggested CheckWiki in the hopes that it could be run by a bot instead of us humans. I fixed over 400 of the errors manually, but I'm sure there are more. Just want to be sure we're all good - don't want you sending your mother-in-law after me.  :-) GoingBatty (talk) 03:27, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

GoingBatty You aren't the only one to make the request this past week. When it rains it pours. I'm upset that they aren't fixing it in VE, not that anybody requested it. Why should we have to fix it? You are safe from my mother-in-law, for now. Bgwhite (talk) 05:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Safe because she's at MY HOUSE! Call her off, Bgwhite! (p.s. To Rose, sorry for all of this drama on your talk page. I'm off now.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Despite Bgwhite's assertion that "they are not going to fix it", the devs have already changed Parsoid to deal with the the invalid wikitext. He is technically correct, though, as the changes were to Parsoid, not to VisualEditor. The invalid wikitext should still get cleaned up anyway, because there are no guarantees that the wikitext parser will always produce the same behavior for this invalid wikitext. There are other approaches to solving this problem, if you'd rather, such as expanding BracketBot to inform people when they've left unbalanced quotation marks in the wikitext editor, or adding an edit filter that warns users before letting them save the page.

__NEWSECTIONLINK__ and __INDEX__ are being added by individual users. It might be possible to disable those in the mainspace on the Wikipedias. They shouldn't be disabled at all wikis (e.g., because some wikis actually use the mainspace for discussions). I'll ask around about it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Whatamidoing (WMF) The bug report for the two magicwords was declined I don't have a clue why. I had high hopes for bracketbot, but the amount of broken brackets has only risen. Bgwhite (talk) 23:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite, I am happy to report that I was able to get a clear answer. (Whether we'll agree with the answer is a separate issue.  ;-) The ability to add or remove __NEWSECTIONLINK__ and __INDEX__ in the mainspace exists for two main reasons:

1. Because some Wikipedias allegedly use the __NEWSECTIONLINK__ on articles.
2. Because if they remove these items from the menu, then it won't be possible to remove these codes from articles when using the visual editor. There's no way for the editing tools to stop someone from typing those codes in the wikitext editor; therefore, the devs believe that it is important to have a way for someone to clean up those codes from inside the visual editor.

That said, it might be worth considering an edit filter (warn the user that these are inappropriate in mainspace?) to reduce the likelihood of someone using them, regardless of the editing environment. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

To reiterate my comment of 11:30, 17 November 2015: the people who actually understand the purposes of __NEWSECTIONLINK__ and __INDEX__ are the only people who need to add or remove them; and will almost certainly be people who simply do not need VE. --Redrose64 (talk) 01:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

But they might also be people who would be annoyed to switch editing tools just to do something so simple. There has been significant pressure for VisualEditor to be "feature complete". I doubt that the editors who are demanding that VisualEditor be able to do "everything" are thinking of this sort of thing, but they are still making those demands. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Your undos

Regarding your edits there: please be aware of WP:OUTING. While the other user was the one attempting to out someone, you repeated their accusation, and copied it onto another page, which is pretty much the same thing. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Beeblebrox: By "repeated their accusation", I assume that you meant that I copied their post verbatim from this page to that. This I did because I dislike split discussions: when a third person comes along, such as yourself, it's harder to follow a split discussion through in chronological order, working out what is being replied to. Then, when third person wishes to reply - do they do so on the page bearing the post that they are replying to - or on the other one (or taken to its illogical conclusion) on their own talk page?

Anyway. I didn't look too closely at the names given by Jocksterdug, other than spotting that one was the Misplaced Pages login name of the edits that they had been reverting; I had assumed that the other was also a Misplaced Pages login name, and that they meant that one of the two was a sockpuppet of the other. Reverting the edits of an alleged sock requires at the least a WP:SPI. Reverting en masse because you don't like the person's political views is not acceptable at all. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Claire Martin (gymnast)

I am sorry I did not respond to you when you first reversed one of my edits. Please explain to me why you reversed my edit on Talk:Claire Martin (gymnast). I added {{WikiProject Gymnast|class=stub|importance=low}} to that talk page. Is she not a gymnast? Is not the article a stub of low importance? I also added {{WikiProject Women's sport|class=stub|importance=low}}. Isn't she a woman, and engaged in woman's sports? Please tell me why my edits were not appropriate for this article. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Dthomsen8, you added a nonexistent template. See the result of your edit here. Judicious use of the WP editor's "Preview" button (as RedRose's edit summary suggested) can help you to avoid this problem, and you should, of course, always check the results of your edits before you move on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Ah, now I understand my mistake. WP:AutoWikiBrowser is a powerful tool, but using it for manual changes is risky. AWB has a preview, but frequent use of it is unlikely, but should be used if any manual, rather than automated changes are made. Thank you, Jonesey, for your help.--DThomsen8 (talk) 02:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Each week I go through Misplaced Pages:Database reports/Broken WikiProject templates and fix up the redlinked WikiProject banners on talk pages. Over a period of months, I've noticed that a lot of them seem to be caused by just three or four people, one of which is Dthomsen8 (talk · contribs), and I can only presume that they are guessing at the template name, and not checking that it actually exists. I never use AWB. I have seen people make whole streams of bad edits using AWB, and then somebody else is expected to clean up the mess. AWB has rules, first of which is "You are responsible for every edit made. Do not sacrifice quality for speed and make sure you understand the changes." --Redrose64 (talk) 10:02, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Protection templates

Hi Redrose64! Hope you are well. Regarding the manual removal of protection templates... I know there's DumbBOT that gets some of them, but any idea why the rest aren't covered? How do you and MarnetteD find those pages that need the template removed? Do they show up in Category:Misplaced Pages pages with incorrect protection templates? You and Marnette deserve endless praise for your diligent, robotic editing in remove those, but I feel this can and should be fully automated. If it's as simple as checking that category, I can write a bot task to do this fairly easily. Otherwise I was thinking I could have the bot monitor the protection log and record their expiries, storing it in a local database, then go off of that to automatically remove the templates. This would be a sure fire way to ensure it doesn't miss any. What do you think? — MusikAnimal 23:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: We do find the pages through that cat, but a simple removal is not always the correct action, since the problem might be one of the wrong template being used, or an incorrectly-set parameter. See the "Remedies" text on that cat page for further information. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Got it. Unless I'm missing something, this all seems like it could be handled easily by a bot. The bot can check the page protection level, and remove the template if it is not protected. Otherwise it can change it to use the correct template and expiry date/format. For template pages it would check if {{documentation}} or {{collapsible option}} are in the source, and remove the protection template if so. I can see a scenario however where one of those template was buried more than one level down of child template transclusions (if that makes sense), and in that case I guess the bot would just have to leave it be for human review. I can even have the bot check the category after it does all of this, and try the null edit trick if it hasn't left the category. That would be where it gives up. Does that sound right? Is this worth me putting time in to? I'd like to help :) — MusikAnimal 23:32, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @MusikAnimal: I'll add a couple things to R's post that I have noticed in working with this category. One of the bots (sorry I can't remember which one) removes any "pending changes" templates soon after the expire. Other protections are hit and miss and I have seen a few where up to two months have passed since the protection has ended. If a page that is already protected has that protection extended or changed the template rarely gets updated and that will cause it to show up in the category. If you get a bot to do most of these that is okay but, as a confirmed wikignome, I am happy to continue to work on these manually. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 23:46, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes I think I can have the bot do that, seems fairly straightforward to implement. Now, I'm not trying to put anyone out of work here, it's just that there's a million gnomy things to do that require humans, ya know? =P I've started with development and will let you know when I file a BRFA. Going to write a note at Category talk:Misplaced Pages pages with incorrect protection templates about this as well. Thanks to you both for your help and the opportunity for me to further assist the community with my bot efforts. Cheers — MusikAnimal 00:36, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Southwaite Railway Station

Hi Redrose64. Thanks for this edit. If you compare the google map satellite images, you'll see you've moved the location further away from the station building. I don't actually care but in this particular case the edit reduces accuracy as a result of reducing the precision. At least the new position is closer than it was before I made the previous edit so all is not lost. Best wishes --Northernhenge (talk) 21:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

It is normal to give railway station coordinates to 4 places of decimals, which is an accuracy of about 10 metres (see WP:OPCOORD) - consider that platforms are rarely less than 50 metres long. It's also normal to give their grid references to six figures (eight characters in all), which although an accuracy of 100 metres, is the same precision as used by such websites as Geograph and Disused Stations. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ordsall chord

This, from the M.E.N., would seem to give quite a good summary of where things are at:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/ordsall-chord-route-better-engineer-10108422

I don't have time to edit it in, but I think a few sentences and a link would be a useful addition to the article. Jheald (talk) 15:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Also High Court decision Jheald (talk) 15:53, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

A beer for you!

Netherlands Antilles template

Hello Redrose64, Could you please help me to change the template for the Netherlands Antilles? Or point me in the direction necessary to get this done? The country does not exist anymore for five years now, and the template is seriously outdated. We should change it to reflect Curaçao, Sint Maarten and the Caribbean Netherlands (Bonaire, Saba, Sint Eustatius) territories, which are the countries and territories to come into existence after the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles. Let me know what you think. Kind regards, (Subzzee (talk) 14:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC))

@Subzzee: By making this edit, all you did was alter the documentation, not the template itself. I reverted that edit because the doc should describe what the template actually does, and which parameters are valid.

The normal way of getting a WikiProject banner template changed is first to get consensus from the WikiProject itself, possibly at Template talk:WikiProject Caribbean but as that has only eight watchers (myself included), Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Caribbean, with 51 watchers, is more likely to produce responses. If there is consensus, then the project banner may be altered; adding more parameters for Curaçao etc. is not in itself difficult, but I would caution against removing support for |Netherlands Antilles= and |Netherlands Antilles-importance= until you can be sure that those are no longer in use.

I would also caution against splitting up an existing work group, particularly one with so few members, since it could mean that some of the new work groups have (essentially) no participants at all, and so are not independently justifiable. See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Guide/Task forces#Setting up a task force structure. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Stubs

Please see this discussion. Thanks. Lugnuts 15:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Immingham

Hello again. Firstly I'd like to thank you for your super explanation of ISBN numbers and how to make them a friend. As a result the penny has dropped and I've made use of the searches. I wonder if someone with the requisite brain cells could create a script/progam or whatever such things are called in Wikispeak to take an ISBN and populate a Cite-book in a standard style? The benefits would be wide-ranging.

I have a whole host of questions on a range of topics, but for now I'll start with the following: as you have seen, I've turned my attention to my late mother's area of origin - Immingham. I set forth this evening to start on the Grimsby District Railway and found the article to be clear and precise but poppycock. The contents are perfectly OK, but nothing to do with the title.

I reckon the contents should be put in a new article with the title Great Grimsby Street Tramways and the GDLR article be left empty except for a warning. I can then set about filling it.

What do you think? Dave DavidAHull (talk) 00:46, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

First, when starting a new topic on a discussion page, use the "New section" tab - don't append your post to an unrelated one, as you did here. See WP:TPG.

There are many tools available for filling in templates like {{cite book}}. I won't recommend one, since I use none of them - I have an off-wiki database that has the details of all my books, and it generates a ready-filled {{cite book}} that I can copypaste.

If you have worked on Grimsby District Railway, why is it a redlink here? That means that the page doesn't exist. What you propose in your last paragraph sounds like a WP:COPYPASTE rename, which is actively discouraged. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Grimsby District Light Railway

The article on the Grimsby District Light Railway is very strange, the contents are perfectly OK, but nothing to do with the title. It's as if the title were Manchester United Football club and the contents were about Old Trafford Cricket Ground.

Could you please have a look at it and suggest or implement a way to enable me to write an article about the GDLR and keep the author's efforts?

With thanks in anticipation

DavidAHull (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? Have you brought up your concerns at its talk page, Talk:Grimsby District Light Railway? --Redrose64 (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Tools to populate cite book references

Could you please direct me to tools to populate correctly set out Cite Book references starting from an ISBN Number? I would not mistake this information for a recommendation.

DavidAHull (talk) 15:48, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

As I noted above, I use none of them. I know they exist, since I've read about other people using them. That doesn't mean that I know what they're called. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Rev deletion at WP:VPT

Does this content truly meet RD2? It is in logs and edit histories all throughout Misplaced Pages. WP:RTV doesn't grant a right to never be mentioned again, and includes "Note that signatures (on user talk pages, article talk pages and project discussion pages) will not be changed". BLP is not usually applied to editors. Prodego 03:29, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

It's one thing to do detective work in order to work out who it was. It's quite another to actually say who it was. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:54, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Defintitely agree with removing the comment for that reason. Does it meet RD2 and does rev deleting it make it any less visible? That information is already in many archives, logs, and page histories, including ones that are a lot easier to find than WP:VPT Prodego 02:06, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Archiving

(talk page stalker) Hey there! I've just noticed that there are plenty of discussions not archived here. Since you're so busy, do you mind if I help you to manually archive them? (Sometimes, the bots malfunction or couldn't work where Misplaced Pages carries out maintenance works so some very old discussions were skipped (to be archived).) Vincent60030 (talk) 06:46, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

No. Leave other people's archiving up to them unless they explicitly ask for help. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Ok, then. Thanks Vincent60030 (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Sutton (Dublin) railway station

Your reversion mentioned a recent agreement on the name. I see nothing in the talk page about it. Where is the agreement mentioned please? Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:20, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

The convention is Xxx (disambiguation) railway station. See WP:Naming conventions (UK stations) and its' talk page. Useddenim (talk) 21:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

We've had several discussions in recent years, mostly on the talk pages of individual stations; Lamberhurst (talk · contribs) and Thryduulf (talk · contribs) may recall which ones. These discussions always ended up with the name remaining as (or becoming) like "Foo (Barshire) railway station". Also, check out the way that templates like {{stnlnk}} are written. For example, {{stnlnk|Sutton|Dublin}} gives Sutton - which is equivalent to ] --Redrose64 (talk) 00:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

See Talk:Seaford (Sussex) railway station, talk:Whitchurch (Shropshire) railway station and talk:Newport (Shropshire) railway station for examples and links. The reason "Town (County) railway station" is used is because the common name is ambiguous so we use the unambiguous official name as a natural disambiguation. Network Rail (and predecessors) use this format for the official name, if they used "Town railway station, County" then we'd use that instead.

The difference here is that this is not a UK station and so the official name might be different - I don't know of enough about stations in Ireland to say. I am unable to find any documented naming conventions for Irish stations (only UK and Poland, plus repeated extensive discussions about the USA). Thryduulf (talk) 02:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

S-rail v rail-line

As my friendly local wikiproject trains expert, perhaps you can explain something? I'm curious to know why wp has two template systems - 'rail line' and 's-line' - doing essentially the same job. I observe (e.g., at Milton Keynes Central railway station#Service summary) that template:rail line involves rather a lot of hand built parameters (see the present WCML services at MKC) whereas template:s-line (as used for proposed Crossrail at MKC) seems a lot neater and promotes consistency (since so much of it is 'canned' in the template). I can see that there is a problem on a few lines that don't have recognised names (Bournemouth - Oxford - Newcastle or Manchester, for example) - but surely the exceptions should be handled as just that - exceptions, leaving the most frequently encountered cases to be handled by a 'most cases' ready-to-wear template? What have I missed? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:42, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

The {{rail line}} template has no subtemplates, it depends upon nothing else; if you feed it duff values there is little visible breakage. Conversely, {{s-line}} requires the construction of a whole heap of subtemplates, and it is very sensitive to duff input. The purpose of (and indeed the requirement for) these subtemplates is not always clear. When adding a new routebox, I always use {{rail line}} as it's predictable, and easy to test merely by previewing. If it looks wrong, you don't start wondering "is the problem with the way I used it, or the way that it interacts with the subtemplates? Code like

{{s-line|system=LCR|line=LCR|branch=Milton Keynes|next=Bletchley}}

looks quite compact, but it uses no fewer than seven subtemplates: {{LCR color}} {{LCR lines}} {{LCR lines/branches}} {{LCR stations}} {{LCR style}} {{S-line/LCR right/LCR}} {{S-line/side cell}} - of these, the first six are specific to Crossrail; and if {{s-line}} had specified |previous=, {{S-line/LCR left/LCR}} would also be necessary. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, yes, that makes sense. I notice that a lot of Italian stations have unresolved parameters (=> ugly display) - see for example Milano Centrale railway station#Service summary - not a great advertisement for s-line! --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

Are your by any chance patrolling my contributions and reverting anything you don't like, no matter if the article has any interest to you or not?Theoosmond(talk)(warn) 17:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I have an extensive watchlist, built up over several years. Most of the pages that you have edited were already on my watchlist; but remember that you first came to my attention because of your persistent removal of red links. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:57, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but what makes you think you can add a page to your watchlist only because I edited it. And by the way, I have extensive knowledge about The King's School, Worcester, which I presume you don't have. Infact, do you know anything about the school right now?Theoosmond(talk)(warn) 18:10, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

What makes you think that I can't add a page to my watchlist? What do you know of what I know? You might think that having "extensive knowledge" about the school somehow gives you more rights than somebody else. It doesn't, see WP:OWN. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

But your only adding it to your watchlist because I edited it, and you didn't like my edit. I'm not saying your not allowed to make up your own watchlist, but I'm not happy with the circumstances over why you added the page to your watchlist. Why do you want to look over me like this? And, by the way, I have seen WP:OWN before, and I believe what it says should happen, and I abide by it. I do not think anyone has more rights to page than anyone else, unless it's their user page. I'm not happy with you just looking over me like a hawk.Theoosmond(talk)(warn) 20:15, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

GWR Pullman Dining

There was no need to remove the times of availability of the Pullman dining service, since you have no idea about GWR and are just on here to gain points maybe next time you should keep you fat nose out of things and try another page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devonexpressbus (talk • contribs) 19:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

What do you know of what I know? The point is, specific train times are simply not encyclopedic. If people need that information, they go to the TOC's own website, which will at least be up to date - the TOC has the responsibility of keeping it up to date, so they do so. We do not. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

GWR Pullman

Yet another idiot on here who likes to fiddle around with peoples content and try to get some sort of points from it. Get a life you stupid fuck, and stop interfering. Devonexpressbus (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2015 (UTC)