User talk:Bob1960evens

If you leave a message on this page, then please add the page to your watchlist, as I shall leave the reply here too. Thanks! Bob1960evens 14:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• /Archive1
• /Archive2007
• /Archive2008
• /Archive2009
• /Archive2010
• /Archive2011
• /Archive2012
• /Archive2013

		The Author's Barnstar
		I hereby award you this barnstar in appreciation of your tireless work on canal maps and articles. May you float forever! - Oosoom Talk 16:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I would like to reward you this barnstar for the excellent and numerous positive contributions you have made to Wikipedia's UK rivers and canal articles. --tgheretford (talk) 23:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring Sleaford Navigation to Good Article status. Khazar2 (talk) 15:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks for another lovely river article. Keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your GA review of The Causeway, it was a pleasure working with you to improve it. Please accept these delicious strawberries as compensation :) - Evad37 (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... it's beautiful! 69.171.101.3 (talk) 02:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bob1960evens. You have new messages at Buttons to Push Buttons's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 20:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob, thanks for creating the Holderness Drain article. Can you revisit it as there is a short reference to "Hadfield 1973" which has no full entry. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 21:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I am still in the middle of creating it, so there will be lots more article in due course. Bob1960evens (talk) 21:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Just a wee note to say I'm working as a volunteer at Doncaster Archive and in time hope to catalogue the papers of William Bunting. There are over 90 boxes and it's a paper mountain to climb. There are a vast number of documents relating to the many court cases undertaken to protect the moors. I've made most progress with the Commons Registration Act (1965) cases which were a key factor in the 'defeat' of Fisons.

I started in January (2014) and work one or two days per week. I've only opened 1/3 of the boxes which are pretty chaotic as far as the content goes.

Let me know if there's any work I can do to augment what you are already doing / have done.

Speug13 Speug13 (talk) 12:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I called into Doncaster Archive when I needed some stuff for the article on Adlingfleet Drainage, and they were most helpful. It is a while since I did the stuff on Thorne Moors, but thoroughly enjoyed reading about Bunting's exploits. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Bob

I'm new to all this Wiki stuff so please forgive me for tardiness and other awkwardnesses (sic). The work on the Bunting archive continues. I've been focussing recently on the "Commons Registration Act 1965" as this forms the biggest single part of the archive (approx 9 boxes)

There are many supporting legal documents giving evidence relating to Vermuyden's activities including the original "Award" of 1630.

I can keep you updated if that's helpful, but it's very slow work taking about two days per box just to clean up and sort the papers and will probably take another day to catalogue. That makes over two hundred days. I've done 35 so far this year.

Regards

Marcus Speug13 (talk) 12:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for keeping me posted. It sounds like it is a lot of work, but will, I am sure, be most useful once it is done. It seems pretty pointless having an archive if nobody knows what is in it, or cannot find anything even if they did know what was in it. I wish you well with the work, and hope it inspires you. Bob1960evens (talk) 12:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Bob1960evens, thanks a lot for reviewing the Zoloti Vorota (Kiev Metro) article, I really appreciate it. You gave a lot of good points and I will be sure to address them. However, I am leaving out of town on a vacation and I will not have any access to internet until Friday (I am in the States). If we could hold off on pass/failing the article until then, that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, § DDima 05:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:45, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob1960evens. Many thanks for your help at improving the Vanajan Autotehdas article and awarding it the first GA status of articles which I have contributed heavily. Regarding the lead section, I probably should still put some more links but otherwise it is hard to find any space for improvement.

What is your opinion, what is still needed to reach the level of Featured Article? --Gwafton (talk) 20:45, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gwafton. I have no experience of Featured Articles, so am not really sure what the criteria are. Bob1960evens (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Witham Third District IDB, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.needaproperty.com/area-guide/East-Midlands/Lincolnshire/Witham-First-District-IDB.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:32, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review of Westhay Moor which has definitely helped to improve the article. I don't mind if it goes under geography or history - I think I put it under History because the peat working etc is historical but agree Geography would be fine.— Rod ^talk 15:45, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that I have recently added some new sections to the River Don Navigation article. I hope that these will not compromise the article's "good article" status. Please note that I have also amended the Navigation routemap and also the River Don article and routemap.

After a long period of inactivity on Wikipedia, old age and infirmity has unfortunately given me more time to sit at my computer. I have been able to follow up field trips done in earlier years and document them in Wikipedia. Davebevis (talk) 09:38, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. I have only just seen your post as I have been on holiday in the Shetlands. Bob1960evens (talk) 21:47, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for note re River Tone. The reviewer, who does lots of stuff on (US) rivers, saw the Hydrology and water quality section as essential so I've started adding to other local rivers eg Parrett, Avon etc).— Rod ^talk 14:05, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you did a lot of work on this article...do you think it would be useful to include a photo of the Lincoln High Bridge, such as File:High Bridge, Lincoln (13th December 2015).JPG, to show the extent to which it restricts navigation to the Witham? Kelly ^hi! 11:11, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't include one, since the High Bridge is actually on the Witham, and there are two pictures of it in that article. Bob1960evens (talk) 23:46, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Kelly ^hi! 11:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Victor Electrics, Bob1960evens!

Wikipedia editor Nepalirider123 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Interesting article.

To reply, leave a comment on Nepalirider123's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi Bob. For a couple of months I have been working through Sunbeam and its associated businesses and owners. I do not have them quite right yet I'm also suffering what I hope is a temporary loss of sufficient enthusiasm to get shot of it all. Main problem now is the occasional conflict and far too much duplication.

I write to seek forgiveness for bursting over the fence into your field by beginning a revision of your new Sunbeam article. Currently some sections are more vague than they need to be (because I have already gathered up the information I just need to spit it out again with references). Not sure that I'd act on it but I can be distressed when another tackles one of my recent articles and seems to destroy it and this is why I write to you.

I'm revising rather than debating on the talk page because there is so much to be adjusted. Please be sure to tackle me wherever you are unhappy/uncomfortable about/with my amendments. Best regards, Eddaido (talk) 08:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddaido. Forgiveness is offered unreservedly, though I am not sure it is really needed, in view of the co-operative nature of Wikipedia. I started the Sunbeam article because I was producing a series of articles on British milk float manufacturers, but realised that in Sunbeam's case, that was a small part of a larger operation. I had a reasonable amount of material for the milk float stuff, and found most of what I wrote on the trolleybuses in the Commercial Motor archive, plus books on trolleybuses and tramways that I have. Consequently, the ownership was a little more sketchy than I would have liked. You seem to be doing a good job of updating that, so carry on the good work. Bob1960evens (talk) 10:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I know nothing about any of the commercial vehicles products. Tried very hard to find an available picture of a Sunbeam milk float but found only the one on the Wolverhampton Heritage site which I presume is unavailable. At least it is a clue to the appearance of one model. If it is any help I think I am very close to finished with this article. My habit is to go back and look at these things later and when I think I can express my thoughts (or do I mean info) better I make changes.The Commercial Motor Archive has for some time now locked me out from its images of magazine pages. Some long time ago I answered the questions in their "why do you want to look at my magazine" questionnaire though I don't know where I placed my foot wrong. That is otherwise a great resource and I miss it. Nice to 'talk' with you, Eddaido (talk) 11:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have several pictures of Sunbeam milkfloats, but I think all of them have copyright issues. I am not really sure how it works, as they were published in 1943, so by the 70 year rule they ought to be ok, but if the copyright is 70 years plus the life of the author, they are not. I have looked at how copyright works several times, but have never quite got to grips with it. I have just looked at the Wolverhampton Heritage site, and the picture is the same as one that I have from 1943 but it has the background removed. Bob1960evens (talk) 11:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob. What a pity you have put so much effort into the format of the citations in this article. I strongly dislike the kind you have used. But I don't run the place do I. Eddaido (talk) 19:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddaido. I am sorry you don't like the style of the citations, but I changed them so that the style was consistent throughout the article, rather than changing half way through. I am intrigued as to why you might not like a style which is used extensively throughout Wikipedia. Bob1960evens (talk) 00:06, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob1960evens, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 18:57, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with the Metroliner GA review! You're bringing an exacting and thoughtful eye to some very technical and dense GA candidates, and I'm incredibly appreciative of your assistance. If you have any GA candidates of your own that you'd like reviewed - now or in the future - please feel free to drop me a line. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:24, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, @Pi.1415926535:. I looked at the GA queue for transport in early June, and there were two of the oldest nominations at the head of it, so thought it was about time to review some more articles, and having started, I am just working down the list. There was only one that I skipped over, because it seemed to me too short, and lacking in a whole lot of detail. I have been pleasantly surprised by the speed at which most authors have addressed the issues, especially after the articles have been in the queue for such a long time. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob, are you coming back to the Paddington tube station (Bakerloo, Circle and District lines) GA review? You said you thought you might have some more comments.--DavidCane (talk) 21:54, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Rosetta Barnstar
	This is the very least you deserve for the Lillie Bridge Depot. Thank you! Po Mieczu (talk) 02:21, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Rosetta Barnstar
	This is the very least you deserve for the Lillie Bridge Depot. Thank you! Po Mieczu (talk) 02:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on my talk page.--Po Mieczu (talk) 00:43, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A note of appreciation for your work on River Till, Lincolnshire. I started it as a mere stub, but you have transformed it into something much better! Thanks. Feline Hymnic (talk) 08:45, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. I have been out and about to take some pictures of it which I hope to add soon.Bob1960evens (talk) 07:53, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob - well done and thanks for all your work on the Coquet. A really valuable redevelopment. Cheers DBaK (talk) 21:54, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. We were on holiday in Rothbury, and I usually like to find something local to write about when I go away. Bob1960evens (talk) 07:21, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice! We're often in that area, but on the coast. It's just great. Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:12, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know you like improving articles about rivers. Thank you! I was surprised to find that there was no article about the River Deerness in County Durham. I've just started one. You might wish to take a look and improve it. Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Feline hymnic. I have nearly finished a route map for the River Deerness, and will see what else I can find. Bob1960evens (talk) 23:12, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2012 you made a series of editd to Sapperton Canal Tunnel (diff), unfortunately the short inline citation "Hadfield 1968" has a different year from the years of the two volumes you list as long references to that author. If you still have the volumes to hand please fix the short citations. -- PBS (talk) 21:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hadfield 1968 changed to Hadfield 1969. Bob1960evens (talk) 17:55, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You added a reference to

• Zebedee 2007

in that article, but without a full citation it's impossible to know what the reference is. Could you add it please?

Also if you use User:Svick/HarvErrors.js, you'll be notified of these errors in the future. If you don't know how to install it let me know, I'll walk you through it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have added the full citation. I normally check that all of the sfn refs work properly, but obviously got distracted. Bob1960evens (talk) 07:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you want to save yourself the reviewing time, the script does that for you. Go to User:Bob1960evens/common.js and create that page with

importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]]

And it will highlight all broken sfn refs automatically. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:51, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the page. It said I needed to bypass the cache, so I used ctrl-F5, but couldn't see what that did. I also tried Ctrl-Shift-R as well, but it was still not obvious. What do I do with the page now it is created? Bob1960evens (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to [1] and see the warnings for Zebedee, it's working. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's magic. Thanks. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Template Barnstar
		For creating the Ipswich Trolleybus RDT, a thing of beauty that showns how far you've come from your earliest efforts. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 19:58, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You used 1:2500 map, 1931-36 in the Cove Brook article. Are they available on-line or just your personal copies? If just from libraries, which ones? I would like to use such in other articles to fill in between NLS 25" ~1900 and more modern sources.SovalValtos (talk) 19:29, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SovalValtos, they are available on line. I use www.old-maps.co.uk. You type in a placename or grid reference, and you get a modern map. Often it is zoomed in too far, and you have to zoom out to see what is going on. Then you click on the map, and it shows a list of all the maps that cover that area. Earliest dates are around 1870, and you get a variety of scales, but typically 1:2500 and 1:10560. Select a suitable date, and you have the map, which you can drag around to see a larger area. Bob1960evens (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, it looks prommissing but I am getting a warning that it is unsafe 'Your connection is not private Attackers might be trying to steal your information from www.old-maps.co.uk (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards). Learn more

NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID.' so I am reluctant to procede. Do you just ignore the warning?SovalValtos (talk) 04:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have been using the site for years, and these warnings have only started appearing in the last week or so. I am not sure what has changed, but I will contact old-maps.co.uk, to see if they know. For the moment, I just ignore them. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:09, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I sent them an email about the certificate error, and it seems to be resolved today. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I have had a first look. I suspect it will take some getting use to. Do you subscribe?SovalValtos (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't, but have wondered about doing so. A few years back you could zoom in and read all the small print, but then they restricted the amount zoom you could do, and it is more difficult to see the detail. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:23, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Years ago you added a reference to Cumberlidge on Thames and Severn Canal but the book is missing from the reference list, Can I assume this is the 8th ed of "Inland Waterways of Great Britain" & add the reference?— Rod ^talk 08:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. I have added the long reference in. I have a utility these days that highlights such missing refs, but I wrote the Thames and Severn content long before I got it. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article cites several short Harvard-style citations without corresponding entries in the bibliography. Can you please add? Or are these typos in years? Missing refs:

• Glover 1998
• Connor 1987
• Bruce 1987
• Hardy 1993

Also, suggest installing a script to highlight such errors in the future. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]] to your common.js page. Thanks, Renata•3 23:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed all of the refs except one, where I cannot at the moment find the text I was quoting. I have had the script for highlighting such errors for some time now, but obviously did not have it at the time I expanded that article. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:31, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have now fixed the remaining ref by adding Bruce 1987 to the Bibliography. Bob1960evens (talk) 12:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bob, in this edit you mention a "long truss". Does this mean a "Long truss"? Dicklyon (talk) 02:51, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dicklyon. I do not think it is a Long truss, as defined by the article on truss bridges. In particular, the Long truss section mentions that such a truss is made of wood or wood and metal, and as far as I understand it, there was no wood involved in Bouch's design. Also, a truss bridge seems to be a single span, whereas Redheugh included three piers, with the truss running through to the viaducts at either side. The three piers were each 252 feet from each other, but the total length of the truss was 743 feet, so there must have been about 120 feet between each of the outside piers and their associated viaducts. I think it was merely a truss that was long. I hope that helps. Bob1960evens (talk) 09:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe that helps. I don't see the word "long" in the cited source, so wondered why you used it. Apparently not for Long truss, but not clear how "long" is assessed otherwise. Maybe we should rephrase? Dicklyon (talk) 01:50, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Long" is assessed by looking at the picture and using common sense. It would be nonsensical to describe a truss of 743 feet as short. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:16, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bob, in Fens Waterways Link at end of first part of the History section is a "LCC 2018" external link. Should this be a reference or a harv link to the entry in the Bibliography section? Regards Keith D (talk) 12:30, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keith, there already is a harv link in the Bibliography section. It is the third item in the list, and if I hover over the LCC 2018, it is correctly highlighted. Does it not work for you? Bob1960evens (talk) 13:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I have just spotted the actual problem. The LCC 2018 needed an sfn before it. It was the other ref to LCC 2018 that I was looking at. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing. Keith D (talk) 22:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bob, The Grand Union Canal (old) page has a section for Points of Interest, but none are displayed because it has PoIgb start|type=collapsed in the first line. Is this a mistake? Can it be removed?Samnviv (talk) 10:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Samnviv, it is not a mistake. Some people like such tables to be displayed, some people like them to be collapsed. If you like maps, you probably want them showing, but if not, probably not. There isn't an auto-collapse option for the PoIgb template, which you can use on some things so that it shows while the article is small, but hides as the article grows. You can remove it if you want to, but my choice would be to leave it hiding. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply, Bob. Let's leave it as it is. It just looked there were no points of interest along the canal! Samnviv (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2011, you added short cite to "Jones 2006" but no such source is listed in the bibliography. Can you please add? Thanks, Renata•3 22:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Renata, It took me a while to remember what I might have been citing, but then remembered that I was probably only editing the article because I had been working on the River Sow Navigation article, and sure enough, Jones 2006 was listed in its bibliography. I have added page numbers as well. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I happened upon a book, more like a booklet, the other day that I had read as a child back in the 60s. It was "Tinker, Tailor," part of a series brought out by Longmans (Heritage Story Books) and it taught children about different professions, one of which was a milkman. All the pictures showed an electric float with a piece of canvas (or cloth) hanging in front from halfway down the windshield (or windscreen in British English). For the life of me I never figured out what that was about and why it was needed. That curiosity was rekindled when I found that book again in the attic. I figured you might know sometime about it. Here is a picture off the web, though this one is more buttoned down as it were. In my book that it was a squarish piece of white cloth hanging from two strings or wires in the front. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:01, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi @Fowler&fowler:, the picture is of one of the early Wales & Edwards floats. They were first designed around 1951, but the driver was really exposed to all weathers, and the canvas was an attempt to give him a little bit of protection from the wind and rain. The W&E article includes an image of the very first W&E three-wheeler, fitted with a similar canvas screen, as there was no windshield. I am not entirely sure when the first model with a windshield was produced by them, but they remodelled the front end in 1955, using a polyester resin called glasspol, and I suspect proper windshields came in at that point. Bob1960evens (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Bob, Very sorry, but I had to go away on account of a family emergency. (Things are fine now.) That is a very insightful explanation. The picture in the book I have does have a flat windshield up top about a foot high through which the driver sees.

Below it hangs the canvas, from roughly the driver's shoulder to the steering wheel.

Below the canvas, the body has a bulging, curved, shape. So, I suspect, as you say, they didn't have the technology to mould a windshield to those limitations (linear to nonlinear). Or the technology was expensive and not worth employing on a humble milk float.

I had first thought the canvas was meant to shield the batteries from the sun, and the batteries were up in the front, but in another picture, they actually show the driver attaching the charging lead to the battery which is under the seat! The book was published in the late 1950s I think, so the copyright hasn't expired, otherwise I would have added the picture.

Thanks again for a nice explanation, and many apologies for a very tardy reply. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lothian Buses has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I realise you have an interest in waterways in the East Midlands.

I recently came across the Car Dyke article, and wondered whether it would benefit from one of those clever maps showing its route. Feline Hymnic (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did wonder about such a map when I expanded the article in 2021. I'll see what I can do. Bob1960evens (talk) 22:53, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It was simply an idea...! Feline Hymnic (talk) 09:12, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Feline Hymnic:. I have had a go at a route map for the northern section, and added it to the article. The southern section below Peterborough is much more difficult to trace. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thanks. All the best. Feline Hymnic (talk) 12:57, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good job! The southern section would be much more difficult, but well worth while…--AntientNestor (talk) 09:30, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bob

My name is Nick Dymott and I am the webmaster and magazine editor for the Herefordshire and Gloucestershire Canal Trust.  I am reaching out to you in relation to the work done by yourself on the Wikipedia page on the Herefordshire and Gloucestershire Canal.

In late 2021 I attempted to make some amendments to the page, but these were not properly supported with citations/references, and the changes I made were understandably undone by user WikiDan61 shortly thereafter.

I wish to make a further attempt at updating the article, particularly in relation to the Restoration of the Canal, and to correct a couple of inaccuracies elsewhere in the article.

In doing so I will attempt to fully support new material with appropriate citations and references, but I am new to Wikipedia and may therefore not get everything lined up correctly at first.

The purpose of this communication is to let you know of my intentions, and to ask that you bear with me, and if at all possible offer guidance on correcting any poor Wikipedia practices I use.

I am reaching out to user WikiDan61 in a similar way to this.

Any assistance offered would be very much appreciated.

Nick Dymott

webmaster@h-g-canal.org.uk Nkneb61 (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick @Nkneb61:. I will be happy to assist in any way that I can. One of the primary requirements for editing Wikipedia is that information added should be supported by reliable third-party sources. For waterways restoration projects, these are not always easy to come by, and so they are often supported by publications produced by the Trust carrying out the work. These have to be treated with care, so statements like "this lock was restored in 2023" are fine, but statements like "this is the best restoration project in England and Wales" are not, and are only relevant if a reliable third party publishes them, because a Trust is obviously enthusiastic about its own projects, in a way that can cloud neutrality. You also need to be careful of conflict of interest, if you are effectively working on behalf of the Trust.

Also, it is not good practice to remove material which is supported by existing references, without clear explanation on why those references are no longer accurate. Keep me posted. Bob1960evens (talk) 09:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you help me with Template:Glamorganshire Canal map, which you have worked on before. Please check my edit. I am unfamiliar with the conventions for these maps and the markup syntax. I added the Bute Docks Feeder, which the Glamorganshire Canal crossed with an aqueduct. The feeder is a non-navigable canal that feeds Cardiff Docks, and is still in operation. Template:Waterways legend suggest the symbol should be a straight mid-blue line under the main canal, but I have added curved line (by copying an earlier symbol). Can you help? Thanks, Verbcatcher (talk) 23:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll have a look at it on Wednesday, and see if I can help. Bob1960evens (talk) 00:28, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Verbcatcher:, I have changed the curved icons at either side of the aqueduct into arrow heads, using the uexCONTfq icon (arrow to right) and uexCONTgq icon (arrow to left). uexCONTf normally points downwards, and the "q" suffic rotates it by 90 degrees. Similarly uexCONTg normally points upwards, and the "q" rotates it. I have also removed the double brackets from [[Bute Dock feeder]] since I think it unlikely that the Bute Dock feeder is sufficiently notable that it would deserve an article of its own. It is more likely to get a brief mention in an article about Bute Dock. There seems to be an article about Cardiff Docks, which has a small section about Bute Docks, where the feeder (also a red link) is called Bute Docks feeder (with an S). If you wanted to, you could link the feeder to Cardiff Docks ([[Cardiff Docks|Bute Docks]] feeder) or to the section about Bute Docks ([[Cardiff Docks#Bute Docks|Bute Docks]] feeder). I hope that helps. Bob1960evens (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I wrote the paragraphs in Cardiff Docks and Glamorganshire Canal. I added red links to Bute Dock feeder because I thought that it was notable for an article. Coflein is a highly reliable source to base this on, and I also found some mentions in a local newspaper. However, I now think it is inadequate and I plan to move the paragraph in Cardiff Docks into another section, and flesh it out. I would then make a redirect for the feeder. Regards, Verbcatcher (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a generic term for the reservoir that supplier a power station - e.g. for Loch an Daimh in relation to Cashlie Power Station? The question may seem odd, but as far as I can see wikidata does not have a model for connecting power stations to the reservoirs that supply them. I get the impression the dominant model in WP is a generator in the dam which forms the reservoir, rather than a generator remote from the dam/resevoir and on the bank of a lake or river into which the tailrace discharges. So, I seek a term to use for the WD model ... 'head reservoir', or somesuch. I think if you don't know, then there probably isn't one. thx. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tagishsimon:. "Head reservoir" tends to be used for the upper reservoir in a chain of water supply reservoirs, but I have not seen it applied to a hydroelectric reservoir. There is an article on Head (hydrology), but it is unsourced, and does not really clarify anything. I think if I were to use a term, I would use "feeder reservoir". This is widely used to describe a remote reservoir feeding a canal, and in essence the setup for many hydroelectric reservoirs is similar. Bob1960evens (talk) 12:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have any objection to me altering the SFN style references on Mangapps Railway Museum to use Template:R and Template:RP instead? It would simply tidy up the references a little - asking because I don’t just want to wholesale change someone else’s work when they’ve literally just done it! Danners430 (talk) 14:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I do not know the Template:R template, but by all means make the change. I am still working on it at the moment, so beware edit conflicts. Bob1960evens (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - I'll hold off until this evening, and drop a note once it's done.

Basically, that template appends the page number for the reference as a superscript next to the inline ref ID - take a look once I've done it, and feel free to revert otherwise Danners430 (talk) 14:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I completely forgot - I’ve made the updates Danners430 (talk) 20:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from top of talk page

Hello, thank you for adding to the Mangapps page, I've been volunteering there since 2014 and it's good see the page being expanded. With regard to 2613 "Brookfield", the info on the industrial loco website is actually wrong as it has been under overhaul since 2015 and i have been photographing the overhaul from start to finish. Hope you don't mind if i change the year to 2015. Thanks again and here is the youtube video of the overhaul with my photos https://youtube/eQKrMmTlX4w?si=75dmA3nhdsjnm2rD Cooper0694 (talk) 14:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry wikipedia won't let me link to the video, if you follow the youtube link on the Mangapps page it should be the most recent video on the channel. Cooper0694 (talk) 14:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) if there's a better source stating it's been under overhaul, then please do - there's actually a discussion ongoing at WP:RS/Noticeboard about the website Preserved British Steam Locomotives Danners430 (talk) 14:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Cooper0694:. Thanks for the info. The issue is that info needs to be sourced for it to appear on Wikipedia, and we have a source for 2020, but not for 2015 (yet). It is a perenial problem. I note that the discussion mentioned by @Danners430: says you can usually find any info from the Preserved British Steam Locomotives website elsewhere, but that is a bit fanciful, I think. The Mangapps website does not even list "Brookfield" on its Locomotives page, and there is no info on the current status of any of the vehicles. By the way, I visited Mangapps in late August, specifically to see the former Southend Pier Train, and got to see 11103 in the workshop while we were at it, which is where the picture came from. I have since written to Mangapps expressing my thanks for a wonderful visit, and enquiring about long-term conservation of the pier train, but have yet to receive a reply. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have watched the video. Good work. The link is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQKrMmTlX4w Is Youtube a reliable source, though? Also, the Wickham trolley does not appear on the Mangapps website. Hey ho. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The note about the discussion at WP:RS was more for info - I'd recommend putting any comments about the source there Danners430 (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of dates is now resolved, as Railway World reports that the overhaul is completed, so I have used that as a ref. Bob1960evens (talk) 14:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

River Don Navigation has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Rescue Barnstar
		This is presented to you by the GAR process in recognition of your sterling work in helping River Don Navigation retain its Good Article status. Please feel free to display the GA icon on your userpage. Keep up the good work! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caltrain Modernization Program has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]