User talk:Jnestorius/2012

Civil parish of St Jude

I was doing some work on the Castleknock article, putting in the civil parishes. I went to the Logainm source to confirm my source when I saw a reference to the parish of St Jude. It listed 6 townlands. I cross-checked the townlands in the OSI archive maps source. They are listed all right, but attributed to the parish of St James. How can this be? Was St. James split after the creation of the 1829 maps? Thanks, Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. Thanks for your labours. So must all 6 townlands of St Jude's be attributed to Castleknock or only some of them? Laurel Lodged (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
According to logainm, all 6 townlands are entirely in Uppercross. Logainm states St Jude's is in Uppercross, Dublin City, and Castleknock. So the parts of St. Judes that are in Dublin City and Castleknock are not in any townland. Most of Dublin City was never assigned to townlands by the Ordnance Survey, so that makes sense. What about Castleknock? That I'm not sure about. Dublin Baronies Act 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c.96) includes in Castleknock:
That part of St. James's, north of the River Liffey, situated without the Municipal Boundaries of the City of Dublin Boundaries, and including 3a. 0r. 10p., at the Great Eastern entrance to the Phoenix Park, lately transferred from the County of the City of Dublin to the County of Dublin
So that provides land in the St. James's+Castleknock not in any townland; some of which may have been moved to St Jude's+Castleknock. But I don't know which part was moved. Following the green parish boundary line on the 6-inch OSI map (which predates the change) the relevant portion of St James' includes the eastern part of Phoenix Park plus the area between Conyngham Rd and the river. Some of the latter is shown as townlands (Liffeybank 4a1r14p and Longmeadows 45a0r25p) in the 6-inch 1830s map, but not in the 25-inch 1890s map. Longmeadows is in logainm, but not Liffeybank. Logainm says Longmeadows is in St James's, not St Judes; it also puts St. James' (part of Phoenix Park) there. I can't make out the parish boundaries on the 25-inch map.
jnestorius(talk) 11:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages

Where's the rule that other projects can't watch disambig pages? There are currently 118 disambig pages being watch by the middle-earth project GimliDotNet (talk) 21:13, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uh...ok, happy watching. jnestorius(talk) 21:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Template:Athletics events

Moved to Template talk:Athletics events#weight throw over the bar jnestorius(talk) 19:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Athletics (track and field) in the United States

Thank you for reverting Tsuchiya Hikaru; despite lots of warnings and multiple blocks, he persists in playing around with categories and emptying them randomly. He's even gotten into it at the Bosnian Wikipedia! Nyttend (talk) 01:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Baronies templates

Hello Joesty. I built a County Clare baronies template a couple of years ago but, following the example of Template:County Mayo, I have now included the Clare baronies within Template:County Clare. I intend to nominate for deletion the Clare baronies template that I created, based on its redundancy.

I poked around a bit and see that you made a few barony templates yourself some time ago; indeed, I assume I copied my design from your precedents. What do you think of incorporating your barony lists within the relevant county templates (compare Template:County Mayo) and getting rid of the barony templates altogether? It seems sensible to me, and tidier, but maybe I am overlooking a good reason for retaining them.

One outcome of having baronies listed in two templates is that the barony articles for County Mayo have the baronies listed twice in templates at the bottom of the article (i.e. Burrishoole, Carra, Clanmorris, Costello, Erris, Gallen, Kilmaine, Murrisk, and Tirawley).

There are eight Ireland barony templates at the moment and two of them, Clare and Mayo, have the baronies already incorporated within their respective county templates, Template:County Clare and Template:County Mayo. Thus, there would be a little work needed to transfer the names of baronies into the six remaining county templates; to update the articles that link to the barony templates to point instead to the county templates; and to nominate all eight barony templates for deletion. We could take take three baronies each and split the task if you like, or I could plod through all six at my convenience.

Let me know what you think.

By the way, who is Joesty Nestorius? Since I saw the name a few years ago, it has rung a phantom bell or caused some kind of echo in my brain, but I can't put my finger on it. — O'Dea (talk) 21:36, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to merging the templates. The maps currently on the barony template are useful and should instead be put directly into the barony articles. I think a discussion of Category:Ireland county templates is needed at WP:IMOS. I think {{Irish county navigation box}} was intended to be a standard format but I don't think it's used much. Different counties include different types of place. I am very much against giant templates that are just a dump of every article in a Category subtree (Category:Geography of County Mayo etc in this case). Navigation templates are meant to aid navigation. Reproducing the same information as a Category page seems to me to be of no use to the reader. Cluttering up a template with every crossroads and townland in the county that happens to have an article is embarrassing.
Joesty or Joestij is an Afrikaner name. Or not. jnestorius(talk) 13:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Road names

I was meant to get back to about road names RNNN (Ireland), as far as I can make out its consistency. I came across this disam page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N18 which shows the various countries and the style of name used in the titles. In this case it was the N routes. Murry1975 (talk) 15:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't prove much. The place to ask is Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways. jnestorius(talk) 15:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So did you ask? It was your qeustion on a road article awhile back. Murry1975 (talk) 17:51, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Thanks for a great work on Ylipe. Cheers, — Racconish Tk 19:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1.5 billion viewers?

The original source for all the claims that "Aloha from Hawaii" was broadcast to 1-1.5 billion viewers is a vague estimate given by Billboard, 16 December 1972, p.18, stating that

Elvis Presley's historic satellite-live television concert, originating Jan. 14 from the Honolulu International Center Arena, is expected to reach a global audience of 1.5 billion viewers.

These viewing figures must be called an Elvis myth promoted by Colonel Parker, especially at a time when Elvis did no longer have as many number-one hits on the charts as he had in his younger years (his last Top Ten hit on the US charts was "Burning Love" in October/November 1972). Onefortyone (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberties, Dublin

What is the reasoning behind your requesting so many page numbers in the above article - do you doubt the references provided? To the best of my knowledge they are all valid, and anyone with a copy of the book or a PDF should have no trouble finding the information. I have edited thousands of articles, but have never come across this degree of questioning. Hohenloh + 13:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Page numbers. A request for page numbers should not be interpreted as meaning: "I don't believe this: give me the page number or I'll assume you're wrong". It means "these references are not user-friendly, please improve them". If, as you claim, it's no trouble to find the information then it should be no trouble to add the page number to the reference. Adding page numbers for inline references helps counteract reference-drift, where a reference-tag originally attached to one statement ends up spuriously referencing one or more unrelated statements after intervening editors amend the substantive text without paying attention to the references. jnestorius(talk) 15:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right- and left-hand traffic

Hi, Jnestorius. The title of the subject article is under discussion again. I am alerting you because you participated in a previous discussion on the matter. —Scheinwerfermann T·C01:33, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Athletics at the 1908 Summer Olympics

Hi, Jnestorius. FYI: A newer editor appears to have a question about information you added to the above article. See Talk:Athletics at the 1908 Summer Olympics – Men's marathon#Alleged protests about the last couple of miles. Cheers! Location (talk) 18:33, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dictionaries of English

Thanks for your work on Template:Dictionaries of English. i had simply tried to rescue a completely useless template from oblivion. i like your improvements. I am not a particular expert on dictionaries, basing it mostly on my laypersons knowledge (i do own the OED and AHD, and a couple of others)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:51, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howler (error)

Please visit Howler (error) talk page to deal with your issues. JonRichfield (talk) 06:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rogue Article, or not?

Do you have any views on Gatton, Surrey whether it is worthy of its own article?
Consider: we already have Gatton (UK Parliament constituency) for when it was a famed Rotten Borough.

MfD nomination of User:Jnestorius/Ireland national football team (IFA) proposal 1

User:Jnestorius/Ireland national football team (IFA) proposal 1, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jnestorius/Ireland national football team (IFA) proposal 1 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Jnestorius/Ireland national football team (IFA) proposal 1 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Magioladitis (talk) 17:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]