![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello! Your submission of
Bentworth at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
That's the formal template over with! Hello, yes, this is a nice little DYK hook, the only problem is that the particular section that's used in the hook isn't cited, which is required. I'll check back later tomorrow if that's ok. Thanks! Rob ( talk) 23:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Bentworth at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
jjron (
talk)
16:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I've had to fix up your edits concerning the parameter needs-infobox, because (a) it wouldn't have worked in the way that you intended and (b) it was placing hundreds (665 at the last count) of pages into Category:Wiltshire articles needing infoboxes. This is the line containing the primary bug:
|infobox= {{{needs-infobox}}}
That denotes a mandatory named parameter (named parameters are the ones where you put |name=value
). If a mandatory named parameter is omitted, funny things happen - in this case, it's taken as the value "yes".
The thing is, if you want |needs-infobox| to be a valid parameter without the use of an equals sign, this isn't a named parameter - it's a positional parameter, which in Template:WikiProject Wiltshire would be utilised like this:
|infobox= {{#ifeq:{{{1|}}}|needs-infobox|yes|no}}
However, hardly any WikiProject banners use positional parameters. To get it to work, I've had to modify the template so that the parameter usage is |needs-infobox=yes
, which means that the line in question becomes
|infobox= {{{needs-infobox|}}}
which is an optional named parameter (the difference between mandatory and optional is the absence or presence of the pipe "|
"). The full list of my changes is:
|needs-infobox}}
to |needs-infobox=yes}}
{{{needs-infobox|}}}
so that omission of the parameter would pass a null value through to {{
WPBannerMeta}}
, which will then recognise the article as not needing an infobox. This has cleared the category down to
Talk:Alvediston alone.|needs-infobox=yes
. I then
inserted a colon between the double square brackets and the word "Category:", so that the cat becomes linkable, instead of trying to place the doc page into that cat. As a non-essential edit, I've
moved it into alphabetical position between listas and small (the parameter category goes last because it's extremely rarely used).|needs-infobox=yes
and also fixed your category link so that it doesn't try to edit the category page.Following my fixes, {{
WikiProject Wiltshire}}
once again conforms to the normal pattern for needs-infobox in WikiProject banners, as seen in, for example, {{
WikiProject Buses}}
, {{
WikiProject Rock music}}
, {{
WikiProject Toys}}
.
If there are any talk pages other than
Talk:Alvediston where you added |needs-infobox}}
, you'll need to amend them to |needs-infobox=yes}}
. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Aviation}}
's examples of using the 'needs-infobox' function but by how they use everything so differently from Wiltshire's template probably made it unable to work. Nethertheless now, I will begin tagging lots of articles with 'needs-infobox' status now the problem is fixed. Where would we be without you?
Jaguar (
talk)
21:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Aviation}}
, and it uses the |needs-infobox=yes
form. Well, all sorted now. Thanks for the barnstar! --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 20 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Burnett, Somerset, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Burnett, a village in Somerset, had a civil parish of 608 acres until it was merged into the neighbouring village of Compton Dando? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for starting the Duncorn Hill article. In the reference you titled "field investigations" ( Rural area 6) the only mention I can find of Duncorn Hill says it is one of "numerous small rounded hills" (para 7.6.23) nothing about it being a Bronze/Iron age hill fort. Is it somewhere else in the document?— Rod talk 20:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to
The Bushranger (
submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by
Hurricanehink (
submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to
Yellow Evan (
submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for
Talk:Hurricane King/GA1,
Miyagawa (
submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for
Dognapping, and
Jarry1250 (
submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (
explanation), claiming for
Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, On Holcombe, Somerset you piped David Hirst to David Hirst (footballer). Do you have anything to support this? I suspect the David Hurst added yesterday is non notable & doesn't have an article - you also changed the spelling of Hirst to Hurst & David Hirst (footballer) was born in Yorkshire in 1967 & played his career a long way from Somerset. He is now 43 & unlikely to be delivering local papers.— Rod talk 08:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for adding page numbers to the references on Cheddar however I do not believe you have consulted the books concerned. It doesn't help anyone if you are making them up. In at least one case you gave a page number which is a higher number than the book concerned goes up to.— Rod talk 21:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that this article is drifting further and further away from the GA criteria rather than closer since I reviewed it a few months ago. Not your fault, I understand, but a shame nevertheless. Malleus Fatuorum 20:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've done some more bits to Cheddar based on the peer review. Although I'm still worried about ref 2 "Report of the Board of Agriculture from January 1, 1903 to January 1, 1905 from the New Hampshire Board of Agriculture" as a source for area, I think it could now be nominated at GAN. However this can not be done while a peer review is running & as you opened Wikipedia:Peer review/Cheddar/archive1 I think it is down to you to close it once you feel issues have been addressed & there is no further value in keeping it running - what do you reckon?— Rod talk 15:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I've removed your reference to a 'large council development' planned for Bentworth, since that is both untrue and unsubstantiated by your reference. The Parish has been put under a lot of pressure by a small handful of individuals, and for what it's worth I don't think you're one of them, but there are others who choose to believe you may be. Please get in touch to discuss, obviously no dispute with factually correct updates on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobes01 ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
where exactly do you consider this inappropriate blanking, its just a list of bars in the city? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.153.113 ( talk) 11:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for having a quick look at Cheddar. If you do review it, I have to warn you that I will be away for a few days so I won't be able to help with the GAN if it opens. But in the meantime I will be willing to extend it and do anything that will help it get to its long deserved GA Status. Regards Jaguar ( talk) 17:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I've tried to get Ukiws to go on the talk page to discuss his position. I've even given him a warning about WP:3RR but he just seems to be ignoring everything but his editing. (I'm completely neutral on this matter and just trying to stop an edit war.) Peridon ( talk) 12:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Greetings, I've made my initial review of Cheddar's GA nomination and put it on hold. there are a few points at Talk:Cheddar/GA1 that need to be addressed before it can be passed. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you need anything, otherwise, ping me when you want me to take another look at the article. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:39, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Duncorn Hill has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Pontificalibus (
talk)
15:10, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Duncorn Hill is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duncorn Hill until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Pontificalibus ( talk) 20:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey mate cheers, im new to wikipedia and im just starting to make my way around, thanks for the information on Signatures :) Webb20k ( talk) 16:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with Category:Villages in Bath and North East Somerset (however it would be help to remove Category:Bath and North East Somerset and Category:Villages in Somerset as Villages in Bath and North East Somerset is a sub cat of both of those & we are not supposed to have an article in both parent & sub categories). As far as the other districts go I think we should definitely do Category:Villages in North Somerset as both BANES & N. Somerset are Unitary Authorities. I am less sure about the others : Mendip, Sedgemoor, West Somerset, South Somerset & Taunton Deane as these are districts within the County Council area as opposed to UAs. I would suggest a discussion on these at the Somerset WikiProject before going too far.— Rod talk 18:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello! Your submission of
Bentworth at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
That's the formal template over with! Hello, yes, this is a nice little DYK hook, the only problem is that the particular section that's used in the hook isn't cited, which is required. I'll check back later tomorrow if that's ok. Thanks! Rob ( talk) 23:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Bentworth at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
jjron (
talk)
16:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I've had to fix up your edits concerning the parameter needs-infobox, because (a) it wouldn't have worked in the way that you intended and (b) it was placing hundreds (665 at the last count) of pages into Category:Wiltshire articles needing infoboxes. This is the line containing the primary bug:
|infobox= {{{needs-infobox}}}
That denotes a mandatory named parameter (named parameters are the ones where you put |name=value
). If a mandatory named parameter is omitted, funny things happen - in this case, it's taken as the value "yes".
The thing is, if you want |needs-infobox| to be a valid parameter without the use of an equals sign, this isn't a named parameter - it's a positional parameter, which in Template:WikiProject Wiltshire would be utilised like this:
|infobox= {{#ifeq:{{{1|}}}|needs-infobox|yes|no}}
However, hardly any WikiProject banners use positional parameters. To get it to work, I've had to modify the template so that the parameter usage is |needs-infobox=yes
, which means that the line in question becomes
|infobox= {{{needs-infobox|}}}
which is an optional named parameter (the difference between mandatory and optional is the absence or presence of the pipe "|
"). The full list of my changes is:
|needs-infobox}}
to |needs-infobox=yes}}
{{{needs-infobox|}}}
so that omission of the parameter would pass a null value through to {{
WPBannerMeta}}
, which will then recognise the article as not needing an infobox. This has cleared the category down to
Talk:Alvediston alone.|needs-infobox=yes
. I then
inserted a colon between the double square brackets and the word "Category:", so that the cat becomes linkable, instead of trying to place the doc page into that cat. As a non-essential edit, I've
moved it into alphabetical position between listas and small (the parameter category goes last because it's extremely rarely used).|needs-infobox=yes
and also fixed your category link so that it doesn't try to edit the category page.Following my fixes, {{
WikiProject Wiltshire}}
once again conforms to the normal pattern for needs-infobox in WikiProject banners, as seen in, for example, {{
WikiProject Buses}}
, {{
WikiProject Rock music}}
, {{
WikiProject Toys}}
.
If there are any talk pages other than
Talk:Alvediston where you added |needs-infobox}}
, you'll need to amend them to |needs-infobox=yes}}
. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Aviation}}
's examples of using the 'needs-infobox' function but by how they use everything so differently from Wiltshire's template probably made it unable to work. Nethertheless now, I will begin tagging lots of articles with 'needs-infobox' status now the problem is fixed. Where would we be without you?
Jaguar (
talk)
21:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Aviation}}
, and it uses the |needs-infobox=yes
form. Well, all sorted now. Thanks for the barnstar! --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 20 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Burnett, Somerset, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Burnett, a village in Somerset, had a civil parish of 608 acres until it was merged into the neighbouring village of Compton Dando? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for starting the Duncorn Hill article. In the reference you titled "field investigations" ( Rural area 6) the only mention I can find of Duncorn Hill says it is one of "numerous small rounded hills" (para 7.6.23) nothing about it being a Bronze/Iron age hill fort. Is it somewhere else in the document?— Rod talk 20:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to
The Bushranger (
submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by
Hurricanehink (
submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to
Yellow Evan (
submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for
Talk:Hurricane King/GA1,
Miyagawa (
submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for
Dognapping, and
Jarry1250 (
submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (
explanation), claiming for
Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, On Holcombe, Somerset you piped David Hirst to David Hirst (footballer). Do you have anything to support this? I suspect the David Hurst added yesterday is non notable & doesn't have an article - you also changed the spelling of Hirst to Hurst & David Hirst (footballer) was born in Yorkshire in 1967 & played his career a long way from Somerset. He is now 43 & unlikely to be delivering local papers.— Rod talk 08:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for adding page numbers to the references on Cheddar however I do not believe you have consulted the books concerned. It doesn't help anyone if you are making them up. In at least one case you gave a page number which is a higher number than the book concerned goes up to.— Rod talk 21:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that this article is drifting further and further away from the GA criteria rather than closer since I reviewed it a few months ago. Not your fault, I understand, but a shame nevertheless. Malleus Fatuorum 20:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've done some more bits to Cheddar based on the peer review. Although I'm still worried about ref 2 "Report of the Board of Agriculture from January 1, 1903 to January 1, 1905 from the New Hampshire Board of Agriculture" as a source for area, I think it could now be nominated at GAN. However this can not be done while a peer review is running & as you opened Wikipedia:Peer review/Cheddar/archive1 I think it is down to you to close it once you feel issues have been addressed & there is no further value in keeping it running - what do you reckon?— Rod talk 15:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I've removed your reference to a 'large council development' planned for Bentworth, since that is both untrue and unsubstantiated by your reference. The Parish has been put under a lot of pressure by a small handful of individuals, and for what it's worth I don't think you're one of them, but there are others who choose to believe you may be. Please get in touch to discuss, obviously no dispute with factually correct updates on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobes01 ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
where exactly do you consider this inappropriate blanking, its just a list of bars in the city? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.153.113 ( talk) 11:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for having a quick look at Cheddar. If you do review it, I have to warn you that I will be away for a few days so I won't be able to help with the GAN if it opens. But in the meantime I will be willing to extend it and do anything that will help it get to its long deserved GA Status. Regards Jaguar ( talk) 17:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I've tried to get Ukiws to go on the talk page to discuss his position. I've even given him a warning about WP:3RR but he just seems to be ignoring everything but his editing. (I'm completely neutral on this matter and just trying to stop an edit war.) Peridon ( talk) 12:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Greetings, I've made my initial review of Cheddar's GA nomination and put it on hold. there are a few points at Talk:Cheddar/GA1 that need to be addressed before it can be passed. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you need anything, otherwise, ping me when you want me to take another look at the article. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:39, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Duncorn Hill has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Pontificalibus (
talk)
15:10, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Duncorn Hill is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duncorn Hill until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Pontificalibus ( talk) 20:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey mate cheers, im new to wikipedia and im just starting to make my way around, thanks for the information on Signatures :) Webb20k ( talk) 16:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with Category:Villages in Bath and North East Somerset (however it would be help to remove Category:Bath and North East Somerset and Category:Villages in Somerset as Villages in Bath and North East Somerset is a sub cat of both of those & we are not supposed to have an article in both parent & sub categories). As far as the other districts go I think we should definitely do Category:Villages in North Somerset as both BANES & N. Somerset are Unitary Authorities. I am less sure about the others : Mendip, Sedgemoor, West Somerset, South Somerset & Taunton Deane as these are districts within the County Council area as opposed to UAs. I would suggest a discussion on these at the Somerset WikiProject before going too far.— Rod talk 18:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |