User talk:Keith D/Archive 57

Archive 50

←

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

Leeds and City of Leeds merger?

There is an article for 'Leeds', which is supposingly referring to the city in Leeds and an article for the 'City of Leeds', which is supposingly referring to the administrative region. I believe these articles should be merged, but before I propose a merger I'd like to consult you as you are one of the more active members of WikiProject Yorkshire.

From my understanding, cities of similar size are inconsistent; Sheffield does not have a seperate article for City of Sheffield (it looks like it once did but was merged into Sheffield?), yet its metropolitan boundaries include towns like Stocksbridge and Birmingham includes towns like Sutton Coldfield. The wikipedia article for Stocksbridge considers it a town within the Sheffield metropolitan borough, similar to places like Pudsey in the Leeds metropolitan borough whilst the wikipedia article for Sutton Coldfield considers it both a town within the Birmingham metropolitan borough and a suburb of Birmingham?

Furthermore, the infobox of Leeds contains 'City and Metropolitan borough' and includes information on places like Pudsey. The infobox of City of Leeds contains 'City and Metropolitan borough'. The articles for Sheffield and Birmingham contain the coat of arms of the city council, despite including towns and not having an article for the city council (as far as I can see).

I'm not too sure about the topic, and I'm (probably wrong!) so any input would be appreciated. Thanks!

Leeds United FC fan (talk) 17:43, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

• For some previous discussion see Talk:Leeds/Archive_1#Merge_with_City_of_Leeds from 2007! PamD 18:22, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

More recent discussion is Talk:Leeds/Archive_/September_2009#Split

The reason for the single article for Sheffield / City of Sheffield is because the two are effectively the same. This is not the case for Leeds (the settlement) / City of Leeds (the whole of the metropolitan borough) where there are numerous other places in the City of Leeds which are not classified as Leeds, such as Pudsey. The last discussion on this resulted in retaining the split and a start was made to perform the split even more in line with Salford, Greater Manchester & City of Salford, which show it can be done effectively. I personally believe that that is the way to go because of the other towns in the borough and is the present consensus. Keith D (talk) 18:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Some of the information in the infobox has been recently added and probably needs removing such as to take out the MP info for all of the non-Leeds settlement. I have struggled with the Leeds articles because of the few, usually non-regular editors and IPs, who are for piling everything into a single article. Keith D (talk) 18:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. From my understanding then, Leeds should be limited to information about the legal city boundary? I am from Pudsey in the metropolitan borough and it is widely considered to be part of Leeds, so it's a strange situation. Also, perhaps there could be a draft rewrite by WikiProject Yorkshire members?

I'd have to disagree City of Sheffield and Sheffield are effectively the same though, Stocksbridge is a town in the City of Sheffield but it isn't within the city borders? Just like places such as Hollow Meadows among others in the Peak District National Park. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 19:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

It should be just about the settlement of Leeds, without information on all of the other towns, such as Pudsey which should be in that article. Things which are global to all of the settlements should go in the City of Leeds article, the council details in the Leeds City Council. A rewrite of the Leeds article was started but stalled I pinged @MRSC: the main author of that, that is still active, but they have not responded yet.

I would probably agree on Sheffield but that is what was said when it was suggested that that article should be split. It was one of the ones that it was decided to leave together.

Keith D (talk) 00:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

It's been seven years so I'm going to reopen the discussion. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

If you didn't see it's at the Leeds talk page, and is there any reason the 2016 Women's Tour de Yorkshire doesn't have the good article icon? Thanks (and sorry for all the questions). Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:35, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

I have added the missing icon, it is usually added when the article is promoted but must have been forgotten for some reason.

I have also notified the projects about the Leeds merge as you appear to have only notified those who are looking for a merge. Keith D (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the good article template. Is it ok for me to add one if I see a missing article in future?

Sorry about that. I didn't intend to ask only the people who supported the merge, I just asked you as one of the main contributors to WikiProject Yorkshire and the most recent editors to the Leeds page (Of who I asked I was of the assumption you and Pam D support Split, one person hasn't voiced their opinion, and 2 others supported merge?). Anyway, thanks for notifying the WikiProject, hopefully there will be a wide range of opinions and we can conclude the best route to go down. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 18:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Thanks for all of your time. If you could do a check that recent edits are all ok - that would be great. Thanks Keith Srbernadette (talk) 22:05, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

•  Done Keith D (talk) 23:13, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Berney baronets

Please do a check up - is the box up the top OK? I placed it there myself. Thanks again Srbernadette (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

•  Done - I have moved the box to the top which is the usual place for it. Keith D (talk) 23:14, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Berney baronets

Thanks keith. can u please place ref number 9 at the end of that paragraph - infront of reference number 10 and with all the other references that are at the end of that paragraph. Thanks so much. Thanks again. Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.180.24 (talk) 11:41, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

You r very quick Keith! The number 9 ref only needs to be at the end of that paragraph with all the other refs. it is repeated unnecessarily. Can u fix up please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.180.24 (talk) 11:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 09:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Hi Keith, I have added in a ref to a newspaper to a quote - can you check that it is ok please if you have the time. Srbernadette (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC) Please leave new quotes in. Thanks form Mike

Berney baronets

I have done the same as the above page - Hi Keith, I have added in a ref to a newspaper to a quote. Please leave new quotes in. Thanks as always Srbernadette (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I do not understand this addition. The quote should be from the main article noted in the reference. You appear to have extended the quote form a different source. As far as I can see this should be a separate reference. Keith D (talk) 23:32, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes - you are right. The extra information is from the on-line newspaper source. (It is newspaper number 12 - going down the list) http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/searchbna/results?memberlastsubclass=none&searchhistorykey=0&keywords=generak%20infirmary%20middleton%20princess%20mary%20leeds%20general%20informary%20%201932%20%20middleton&from=1920&to=1933

Above is the source - I will try to do this myself - please check up if you are able Thanks Mike

I have done it - and it looks OK to me - Can you please check

and also:

James Matthews (racing driver)

is it all OK? Thanks so much again, Mike

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

You will see that I have added some old newspaper reports as citations. I do hope that it is all OK. Can you please check - I have noticed that you sometimes place the name of the newspapers in italics - should that always be done? - it seem a good idea. Thanks again Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.180.24 (talk) 10:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, newspaper titles are always in italics. Keith D (talk) 10:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thnaks Keith

ONE LAST THING! Reference number 7 on the above page has a date - 26th February - which is not in the actual citation. It (the date) should be removed. The rest of the citation is fine. I am too scared to edit it in case I get it wrong. Thanks so much as usual. Mike

Tech News: 2016-45

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• Victoria Coleman is the new Chief technology officer for the Wikimedia Foundation. [1]
• First release candidate for MediaWiki 1.28 is now available. [2]
• .gitreview for MediaWiki branches and extensions switched from targeting a specific branch to using track=1. [3]
• Section numbers in Table of Contents boxes will use grey to improve readability. [4]

Changes this week

• The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey begins on 7 November.
• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 8th. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from November 9th. It will be on all wikis from November 10th (calendar).
• Special:ActiveUsers will allow users groups selection. [5]

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 8 November 2016 at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
• You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topics this week are Image Thumbnail API and allow SVG files uploaded on MediaWiki to have XHTML namespaces. The meeting will be on 9 November at 21:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• RevisionSlider will be enabled by default on all beta wikis, on testwiki, testwiki2, mediawikiwiki and de.wikipedia.org. [6][7][8]
• Upcoming holidays will impact deployments. The schedule has been published.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

23:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Sorry Keith Ref number 17 on this page also has the silly date in it -February 26 -; which should be removed - (but not the quote itself) Thanks so much Mike

Jamie Thackray

Why do you keep reverting my Edit if i have gotten the information and edited the changes with Jamie himself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexfr (talk • contribs) 09:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

See your talk page that I was editing when you sent this message. Keith D (talk) 09:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Leeds merger

Do you have any remaining concerns that could be addressed? Leeds United FC fan (talk) 18:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Most of your arguments are based on your thoughts / preferences and a large number of your statements are not backed up with any proof. The arguments you put forward are contradictory as to what should be done, especially over split for Birmingham and Sheffield articles. The most convincing argument for the split so far is the large percentage of population in the borough are not actually Leeds but some other place. Keith D (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The main problem is that Leeds is widely used to refer to the majority of places in the metropolitan borough that are not in the urban subdivision. Surely a merged article would be more representative of 'Leeds' as it includes all the possible ways one could define Leeds; the urban subdivision, metropolitan borough and the non-legally defined area that is commonly referred to as Leeds? And not only that, you even get more accurate statistics (things like population, GVA and other economy statistics) and sources. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Leeds is rarely used as the urban subdivision. In common talk, Leeds is usually referred to as the undefined but approximate area that includes the urban subdivision + adjacent areas among others. I'd approximate makes up around 90% of the district (just excludes Otley and Wetherby among some other villages pretty much). And in the media Leeds is usually referred to as the district. The urban subdivision is hardly ever used to describe Leeds.

The local newspaper (Yorkshire Evening Post) which is widespread refers to Leeds as the district (see what it claims the population of 'Leeds' is in these)

(http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/leeds-in-the-noughties-the-city-s-changing-population-1-2236400),

(http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/9-reasons-leeds-should-be-crowned-capital-of-yorkshire-1-7457998),

(http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/opinion/greg-mulholland-after-trolleybus-fiasco-let-s-get-leeds-on-track-for-future-1-7921427)

These are just some I quickly thought of from articles I had read recently. It is consistent throughout.

And here's a source that Wetherby is referred to by the media as part of Leeds (http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/lifestyle/bars/pub-review-the-royal-oak-wetherby-leeds-1-7672455)

The ONS does refer to Leeds as the district.

(http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadTableView.do?a=7&b=6275150&c=Leeds&d=13&e=16&g=6374502&i=1001x1003x1032x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1478727904072&enc=1&dsFamilyId=75)

And so does the city council.

(http://www.leeds.gov.uk/council/Pages/Leeds-population.aspx) Leeds population refers to the district.

And then the GVA data refers to the district as 'Leeds', not 'City of Leeds'/'Greater Leeds'/

As I said a merger works for all descriptions for Leeds, and the urban subdivision is the least common and is only really used for statistical purposes so I find it quite ridiculous that the Leeds page refers to that. If we write it in the style of the Sheffield page I feel it would work wonders. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 22:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

You seem obsessed by population statistics here, the article is much more than just population statistics. Keith D (talk) 22:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Well there's the population which does give what it considers the boundaries of Leeds.

There's the local press referring to Wetherby as Leeds: (http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/lifestyle/bars/pub-review-the-royal-oak-wetherby-leeds-1-7672455).

There's the GVA data which is the metropolitan borough whilst being the data for 'Leeds'. (http://www.leeds.gov.uk/Business/Pages/economic-performance-and-key-sectors-in-Leeds.aspx)

The ONS data also refers to Leeds as the metropolitan borough

The climate data for everywhere refers to the city centre (since there is data for places like Hunslet which is 1 mile away). So it's not a case of they consider Wetherby not part of Leeds so it has different climate data.

The demographics/religious data/ethnic group data refers to Leeds as the metropolitan borough on the ONS (There's a Microsoft Excel sheet the ONS provides)

I'm really sure not what to else include to be honest. I wouldn't call it just population. The Yorkshire Evening Post has numerous more articles referring to Otley and Wetherby in Leeds. The district has more data than the urban subdivision which seems to be just population (and it doesn't refer to it as Leeds, it refers to it at Leeds urban subdivision unlike the district data). And I reiterate the urban subdivision is the least referred to interpretation of Leeds, there are several interpretations (the district by the media and statistics (the Leeds urban subdivision is clearly referred to as Leeds USD not Leeds), and most of the district (the urban subdivision + many other areas)/sometimes the whole district in common language) Leeds United FC fan (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Technical problems I am trying to link up these 3 people to sections on the Lupton family page:

1)Lady Maroress, Elinor Lupton (attach to Athur and descendants section on Lupton page) 2)Mayor Arthur Michael Lupton (attach to Arthur and descendants section) 3)Sir Charles Lupton - he has his own section - Charles and descendants - on Lupton page

Please help if you can. Thanks again Srbernadette (talk) 23:01, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done You need the article name of it is not a section of the current article Keith D (talk) 12:41, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-46

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• When you edit with the visual editor you can use meta + shift + k to add a reference. The meta key is often the control key or command key. [9]

Changes this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 15. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from November 16. It will be on all wikis from November 17 (calendar).
• In Special:Preferences you can choose which language menus and buttons will be in. If there is no translation for that language, MediaWiki has a list of fallback languages. A fallback language is a language many will understand better than English. MediaWiki will now use English when there is no Ukrainian translation. [10]

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 15 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• Magic links might not work in the future. [11]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Christian Darnton

Hi Keith. Another Leeds-oriented article for you to double check if that OK Please! Thanks so much Mike

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Keith D.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Thomas Fairfax

Please check the updates/edits on this famous Yorkshireman. Thanks Keith

Meghan Markle

Hi Keith. I know that the above page pages is not Yorkshire-oriented, but can you please check it over.

Also

Angie Dickinson

Thanks as always from Mike - NB I will be doing much correction here at college so will not be editing for a while. Cheers

The Danse Society

Hi.

Don't know if you're interested in looking into this, but noticed there is a years-long dispute on this article - the result of a band reforming, and then splintering into 2 bands who both continue to use the same name (neither with the original singer, but both featuring original members). Whilst I'm sure all the editors involved are band members, user Paulnashuk1 who removes any mention of the other incarnation is clearly identifiable and should probably be blocked due to conflict of interests and his clearly biased editing.. With a dispute like this - should one outfit get to take control of the page like they have? I have no connections to anyone involved (in fact, hadn't heard of the band until I came across the article), but am very surprised this edit warring has managed to go on so long.

79.69.106.41 (talk) 14:50, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I have removed the link from the article and left a note on the talk page but does not appear to have been resolved the last time it was discussed in 2014. Keith D (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-47

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• Administrators, bureaucrats, oversighters and checkusers can now use two-factor authentication. This makes their Wikimedia accounts more secure. This can be turned on in Special:Preferences. There are discussions on how to best turn it on for everyone. [12]
• You can now search for file properties. For example you can search for media type, how big a file is or what resolution it has. [13]
• The latest Collaboration team products newsletter has been published. It has more details about their work than Tech News has.

Problems

• A hacker group is hacking Wikimedia accounts. They can probably do this because users have the same passwords on Wikimedia wikis as on other sites. Please have a password you use only on the Wikimedia wikis and nowhere else. This is especially important for administrators, bureaucrats, oversighters and checkusers. These users can also turn on two-factor authentication. [14]

Changes this week

• There is no new MediaWiki version this week.
• RevisionSlider will be a default feature on German, Arabic and Hebrew Wikipedia. This will happen on 22 November. It will come to other wikis later. [15][16][17]

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 22 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• It will be possible to do cross-wiki search. The developers who work on this are looking for communities that want to test this. [18]
• Hovercards will leave the beta stage. The Wikimedia Foundation Reading Web team wants communities to set Hovercards as a default option for readers who are not logged in. Communities that are interested can say so on the Hovercards talk page. [19]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Keith D. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Immaculate Heart College

Please do a general check - again sorry!!!! Ref number 2 is from a book (is it all OK?) and should refs 1 and 7 have their publishers listed? Please leave in quotes. Thanks as always. Mike

I have made minor tweaks to a couple of refs. Ref 1 & 8 do need a publisher and 6 needs an accessdate. Keith D (talk) 02:20, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Monash University

Please check my edits on this page if you are able to. Thanks - (I know it has nothing to do with Yorkshire!!) Mike

Admiral John Storr

I have, almost accidentally, come across this name in my searches. To be truthful, I have never heard of him, but with just a little digging around he is clearly notable, with strong connections to East Yorkshire. To give you an idea, he is buried in Westminster Abbey and has a tablet and bust therein. His naval history is online, has a listed building in his name, which is close to Hilston, or Roos, presumably depending how the wind is blowing ?! He is already mentioned in the Humbleton and Hilston articles, plus he has an entry on the French Wikipedia.

Frankly the subject matter is way out of my comfort zone, but perhaps you, or someone you have wiki connections with, may like to create an article. Please feel free to come back to me, if you would like to decline this once-in-a-lifetime offer ! Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:40, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

@Derek R Bullamore: unsure of the reliability of the reference for the naval career, but I have done a translation of the French article and added a few bits from the other links you gave. See here. More work needs doing so if you want to edit it feel free, will put live at some point when I think it is OK. Keith D (talk) 00:01, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Very well done. More links - [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30] - as if you need them ! He is most definitely notable. His connection to my part of the woods is intriguing. I played cricket at Humbleton - extremely badly it must be said - however the parish of his birth, so it says. I may be able to supply more, or not as it turns out. Many thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

More links from Google Book - [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41]. Not certain there is anything really new in all that, but I have done what I can. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. May be a time before I get round to doing more on this as time is short and still working on watchlist from last break. Keith D (talk) 19:11, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I have now put live as John Storr. Keith D (talk) 22:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Excellent; and thank you. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

York Outer Ring Road

Keith, i am just after a bit of advice. I have been gradually helping other editors with road articles in Yorkshire and have a conundrum. There is, IMHO, a legitimate article on York Outer Ring Road, but as it is made up of two differently numbered roads, i think there should be an article on the A1237 as well. I have found some good online book references to do the article. Does this seem reasonable? Also, how do i get around the redirect for the page which already exists for it?Rimmer1993 (talk) 11:31, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I would create the article if there is significant parts of A1237 that are not part of the ring road. As you have references then that should support a separate article. Though will have to avoid too much duplication between the articles or there may be calls to merge them.

You can just edit the redirect into an article, unless you are creating the article somewhere else and intending to move it to the place of the redirect, in which case you will need to have the redirect deleted before you can move the article to that name. Keith D (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Keith. I have found out that i can edit the redirect page, so will do so. The existing York ORR article is fairly short and is no more than a statement of how the A64 and A1237 combine to make the ORR and with inexact references. I have taken some of the detail, but I'll publish what i have and see whether there is call for merging and take it from there. Wikipedia is all about finding a consensus and improving articles after all.Rimmer1993 (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Guideline advice please?

Dear Keith, if you know, can you please remind me where there is a guideline on UK and Ireland terminology and the changing thereof? It says, in effect (but much more politely) "please don't just stick on your size 12s and go tromping around in articles willy nilly changing England to UK or UK to Britain or Scotland to Scotland, UK, Yurrup, The World". I know I've seen it but I am failing to find it and I thought it was good advice for new editors who show up here and decide to Right Great Wrongs because they must be put right. If you can remind me, then great. And if you can't - well, no worries whatsoever. I am not exactly overflowing with time and motivation for Wikipedia these days so if I don't see the guideline, nothing very dramatically bad will happen very suddenly! Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2016 (UTC) PS I am really, really, really sorry if I have ever asked you this before. I worry that I may have done so. This time I will keep the answer to hand ...

Cannot put my finger on it immediately. The 2 that come to mind are WP:RETAIN and WP:UKPLACE but do not think they cover this case. Keith D (talk) 20:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I'll keep looking - and of course I will tell you if I do find it. Cheers DBaK (talk) 07:59, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Monash University

Please check if you can - recent edits - leave in quotes. Thanks so much. Mike (again!)

Frances Shand Kydd

Please check edits on this page too if you are able Thanks again

Emmanuel College, Warrnambool

Please check edits. Thanks so much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.188.199 (talk) 10:37, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-48

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes this week

• When someone tries to log in to a blocked account they will be blocked by a cookie. This means their browser will be blocked even if they change their IP address. This makes it more difficult for returning vandals. [42]
• When you use Content Translation to adapt a template to a new translation it will work differently. You can adapt big templates such as infoboxes. Translators will have control over the template parameters. A first version of this is released this week. It is possible it will not work correctly with all templates. There will be more updates for this soon. [43]
• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 29 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 30 November. It will be on all wikis from 1 December (calendar).
• Gadgets will have a new option called "hidden". This means you can register gadgets that can't be turned on or off from the preferences page. Hiding gadgets was already possible by using [rights=hidden]. You should now use [hidden] instead. [rights=hidden] in old gadgets should be changed to [hidden]. [44][45]

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 29 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• Tool Labs could get two new policies. One would be to be able to adopt tools without an active developer. The other would be a right to fork. There is a request for comment on Meta.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Pornography Addiction

Hundreds of millions of people around the world are accessing adult XXX material on a daily basis. They do not consider it to be obscene and disgusting. XXX material has never harmed anybody except Bible Bashers who that engage in real-life pornography with their partners. Virtual Sex has never damaged anyone and it has never damaged me. I have been accessing XXX since 1969. Your edit has the endorsement of Pope Francis. Dickie birdie (talk) 16:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

You are going to explain further as I have no idea what change I have made that you are referring to. Keith D (talk) 16:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for edit

Oops! Thanks Keith for cleaning up my extra zero yesterday. A bad habit of mine, which I'm trying to drop. - Cheers, Meticulo (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - December 2016

Delivered December 2016 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

21:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-49

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• You can choose to see users from specific user groups in Special:ActiveUsers. [46]
• Everyone can now see Special:UserRights. Previously only those who could change user rights could. Other users got an error message. [47]
• ORES can now show how likely an edit is to be damaging to the wiki with different colours. This only works for languages that have trained ORES to recognize damaging edits. [48]

Changes this week

• You will now see categories with 0 pages in Special:Categories. Previously you did not see empty categories there. [49]
• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 December. It will be on all wikis from 8 December (calendar).

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 6 December at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey will decide what the Community Tech team will work on next year. You vote for wishes on the survey page until 12 December. You can see what has happened to last year's wishes on the 2015 results page.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Switching Infobox river to Geobox

Fair enough, I'll desist; I wasn't trying to be political. It just came from the observation that the geobox clearly seems to be the currently favoured one, given the vast majority of major rivers use it, and that some of the fields I've been adding don't seem to work in infobox. I'd established a geobox 'template' in which it was easy for me to add the fields I've been adding that didn't work with infobox. But I'll leave all pages that have infobox and only add them to the geobox ones or ones without.Smb1001 (talk) 14:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I think all of the fields the were deemed useful in {{geobox}} have been made available in the {{infobox river}} template. Though unsure if all of the changes have been put live as yet. Keith D (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Keith - two Yorkshire related articles:

Princess Eugenie of York

Please check new refs. Thanks

Spencer Matthews

Please check refs.

Brooksbank baronets

Please also check new refs.

Thanks again so much. Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.188.199 (talk) 05:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-50

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• Users who have Yahoo email addresses could not use Special:EmailUser to send emails. This has now been fixed. Emails will now come from a @wikimedia.org address. Users who get an email from you will still reply to your email address and be able to see it. [50]
• You can now see how many categories and pages there are in the categories in Special:TrackingCategories. This is to help you find pages that could need attention. [51]
• Markup colours for reviewed and pending revisions in the page history and recent changes and logs now match Wikimedia standard colours. The "You have a new message on your talk page" notification will have a slightly different colour. [52]

Problems

• Because of work on cross-wiki watchlists global renaming is not working. The plan is to turn it on again on 16 December. Global renaming was turned off for a while in late November and early December as well. [53]

Changes this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 13 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 14 December. It will be on all wikis from 15 December (calendar).

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on December 13 at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:29, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Archive 50

←

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60