|
Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 6
Wikimania travel plansWhich flights are people taking to Wikimania? Should we try and take the same one? I figure I booked pretty much the standard one for people going from the London area and just staying four nights. Edward 28 June 2005 22:32 (UTC)
British Airways - London Heathrow (LHR) / Frankfurt (FRA)
Ryanair - London Stansted(STN) to Hahn Frankfurt(HHN)
BMI - Heathrow Airport Flight BD3197
British Airways - Bristol (BRS) to Frankfurt (FRA)
Scots WikipediaJust to let people know in case anyone missed it. A Scots version of Wikipedia is now operational. Anyone who knows some Scots and wants to contribute is welcome to do so. -- Cheers Derek Ross | Talk 3 July 2005 23:14 (UTC)
Thought I'd bring to your attention that British and Irish current events has been proposed for deletion, since nobody's put anything on it since May. Personally I object to this listing since the proposer and most of those voting to delete seem to have little posting history beyond a month or so, and seem to limit most of their edits to VFD!! You may care to pop over and vote to keep. As I note on the VFD page, several other regional current events pages haven't been edited since May either, and they're not up for deletion. -- Arwel 6 July 2005 18:41 (UTC)
I'd really like help with this page - I'd almost nominate it for VfD but for the unpleasant people who hang out there. This page is not NPOV, and really should be merged with chav anyway. It's appalling class prejudice - calling them "scum" in the first para etc. There seem to be lots of regional variants appearing all over the wiki - all with similar problems. This one has a photo of someone to illustrate the stereotype - does this person know they are being used like this? (They are actually people which may surprise some contributors). This is just nasty and horrible. I hate the pure prejudice that has produced articles like this. Thankfully our articles on race issues are nothing like this. Secretlondon 19:31, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
Done, SqueakBox 21:28, July 17, 2005 (UTC) Open Tech 2005I know it is short notice, but I going to Open Tech 2005 in London this Saturday, 20 July 2005 and I wonder if any other wikipedians are going. Edward 21:55:42, 2005-07-20 (UTC)
Heads upSomeone just removed all references to Scotland and England being nations, inserting "kingdom" instead. I've reverted their edits, but it might be one that needs watching. -- Francs2000 | Talk
Well Dudtz might want watching in general. He's leaping between pages, making wild generalisations on their talk pages about the content, and then getting leapt on by a multitude of users. It's actually quite fun to watch. -- Francs2000 | Talk It's strange - I don't think I've seen anyone trolling talk pages like that before... Shimgray 22:49, 21 July 2005 (UTC) more vandalismSomebody who understands the sport might like to review the anonymous edits to Aberdeen F.C. today. They look quite POV to me, and I've reverted a bunch of edits to other football articles from one of these editors, but I can't tell if anything's worth keeping in this article from the last 13 edits (ten in the last 5 hours). --ScottDavis 14:28, 21 July 2005 (UTC) London MeetupThere will be (yet another ;-)) London meetup on Sunday, the 11th of September. James F. (talk) 15:07, 21 July 2005 (UTC) There has recently been an edit war at the 1996 Manchester City Centre bombing page. As User:Lapsed Pacifist who appears to be a noted Irish Republican POV pusher (by a number of people), keeps removing references to terrorism on the article. Even though that is quite obviously what it was. I thought I should bring this to everyones attention. G-Man 20:17, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
British vs. English in category namesI realize that there's a significant distinction in meaning between "British" and "English", but in practice it seems to me that it's often applied arbitrarily in Wikipedia categories. For instance, I just grouped several titles by Virginia Woolf into a Books by Virginia Woolf category, and noted that some of them had been filed as "English novels" and others as "British novels". I'm not going to suggest a category merge, since I know they're two different things, but I would suggest that somebody should probably take a few hours to do some cleanup on English vs. British in categories. Bearcat 22:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
BET: Black Entertainment TelevisionI'm trying to verify an edit by a problematic editor who does some good edits but too many nonsense edits. Does anyone know if Black Entertainment Television has any broadcast in the United Kingdom? I couldn't find out anything on their website, but I am guessing that at least BET Jazz might be available on cable or satellite in the UK. TIA. BlankVerse ∅ 05:44, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
Lancashire Parliamentary ConstituenciesDon't know where else to put this!! I am amending the Lancashire Parliamentary Info pages to the best of my knowledge. If anyone can help, please do. dok 21:08, 7 August 2005 (UTC) (Transferred from Category talk:UK Wikipedians by Francs2000 | Talk
England geo-stub WeirdnessIf you check out Category:England geography stubs, you'll notice that there's a load of stubs there for Northumberland towns and villages. However, a few hours ago, hardly any were there, even though many pages had the stub linking to it. I went through List of places in Northumberland and for every page with england-geo-stub, I clicked edit, changed nothing, then saved. They then popped up on the England geography stubs page. Why is this? Is it a bug? Is it just me? - Hahnchen 23:52, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I note that this has been deleted, although it is still linked to from several places (mostly via the broken redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Malt Whisky) and only three people participated in the deletion discussion - and one of those is a VFD addict. I've no idea whether it was worth keeping or not, but I thought I'd bring it to people's attention anyway. If nobody wants it resurrected I'll list the broken redirect for deletion. sjorford →•← 15:46, 16 August 2005 (UTC) Heads Up: A Familiar Soap BoxAt Talk:Buckinghamshire and Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (places)#Trad counties of England infoboxes User:80.255 and User:Owain have pulled out a familiar soap box and are asserting that Buckinghamshire (traditional) should exist as a separate article from Buckinghamshire or History of Buckinghamshire. This does get rather repetitive I'm afraid. -- Francs2000 | Talk Deletion listHello, I just wanted to let you know about a list of UK-related items on Votes for Deletion. It's part of WikiProject Deletion sorting, and you can find it here. I hope you can use it to track and contribute to UK-related deletion debates. This list gets a lot of traffic, and it might be useful to subdivide it further -- however, I will leave that up to expert local editors such as yourselves. If you find the list useful, please also help keep it up to date. By the way, new deletion sorters are welcome and needed. Join us! Cheers, -- Visviva 03:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
London Meetup finalisedThis is just a notice that the next London Meetup will be as follows:
Meetups are always fun (well, they have been so far); feel free to come along. If you are going to do so, please add your name to the list (yes, I know, it should probably be on Meta; it isn't for hysterical raisins). If you're already on the list, please check that you can still make it, and possible upgrade your status to "definite". :-) Look forward to seeing as many as possible of you all there. James F. (talk) 23:22, 18 August 2005 (UTC) There is currently a debate about whether cricket should be about the sport or a disambiguation page (triggered largely by the claim that US people only recognise the insect. Please see the discussion and "poll" at Talk:cricket. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:32, 19 August 2005 (UTC) Birmingham meetupUser:TheoClarke is proposing a meetup in Birmingham in January (about time too), see Wikipedia:Meetup/Birmingham. G-Man 12:27, 20 August 2005 (UTC) How do I add my profile?Hello, I'm a Uk TV presenter and would like to add my profile. Is this possible? Thank you.
This page needs watching. I've just removed an awful lot of nonsense editing from the article that has been added in spits and spurts since the beginning of August. As the editor(s) appear to have been coming back to the page again and again I wouldn't be surprised if it gets added back. I can't warn them personally because they have a proxy IP. -- Francs2000 | Talk
A tense debate has arisen as to whether to categorise him as a native of Birmingham. It's not where he was born but it is where he grew up, SqueakBox 22:22, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
Two different concepts would best be reflected by two different categories: "Residents of Birmingham" and "Natives of Birmingham" are both potential subcategories of "People of Birmingham". Oddie is a native of Rochadale and a past resident of Birmingham and (I understand) a present resident of Blackburn and London. Photos from Geograph websiteI just noticed the Geograph website at http://www.geograph.co.uk/ and it has loads of medium-sized photos that are cc-by-sa-2.0 and aims to cover the whole of the UK and Ireland. I have already contributed 1 image and if you're just searching for general things it's a good idea to use google to search it - http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Ageograph.co.uk&meta= but I just thought I'd mention it here. Dunc|☺ 19:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
The Geograph.co.uk Collective reserves the right to impose additional terms and conditions upon Your use and viewing of the Site, and any such terms and conditions may be posted on the Site in connection with those Site Materials. You may not reproduce or retransmit the Site Materials, in whole or in part, in any manner, without the prior written consent of the owner of such materials, except as follows: You may make a single copy of the Site Materials solely for Your personal, non-commercial use, but such copying must be consistent with any applicable additional terms and conditions and You must preserve any copyright, trademark, or other notices contained in or associated with such Site Materials. You may not distribute such copies to others, whether or not in electronic form and whether or not for a charge or other consideration, without prior written consent of the owner of such materials. Justinc 23:28, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
First note that they are cc-by-sa-2.0 not cc-by-2.0 and cover the whole of the UK and Ireland. It does appear to be contradictory - I might have to contact them. But they seem to be pro-open source and it also says in their FAQ "Images are licenced for re-use under a Creative Commons Licence" Dunc|☺ 21:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Lancashire railway stationsJust to advise - I have created articles for the Lancashire rail stations of Leyland, Euxton and Chorley. The more technical side of Wiki is burning my brain a little, so I hope the boxes and templates greet you well. dok 09:15, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
AluminiumPeople are trying to enforce US spelling on the Aluminium page, see talk:Aluminium. Jooler 06:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
There are some legitimate questions over the original use of English in the article beginning to appear at talk:Aluminium. Its threatening to become a messy argument now, which is a shame because there had been a stable truce for a while. -- Solipsist 14:06, 14 July 2005 (UTC) This kind of petty argument is probably inevitable, despite your best efforts. I'm keeping away from it. Spelling doesn't matter as much as good behaviour. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:49, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
What does 'unionist' mean in a Scottish context (as opposed to Ulster). Some informed Scots contributing to a debate on this article would be helpful. --Doc (?) 08:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC) Support neededSupport is needed to prevent those who have little understanding of the matter from moving the pages at Talk:The Football Association and talk:The Football League Jooler 13:24, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
. I'm afraid you are wrong on this one. Secretlondon 14:44, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
A proposed addition to this article is languishing on the talk page. The sole comment on it so far has been an objection from one of the vandals who had been scribbling all over the article before I protected it, on the grounds that the cited source doesn't support what the vandal had been scribbling. Comments from editors who haven't been vandalizing the article would be welcome. Proposed additional text further discussing how people view this person, similarly attributed to specific cited sources, would also be welcome. Uncle G 02:58:58, 2005-09-09 (UTC) Election coverage - request for commentNew Zealand has its general election in one week's time. Can British wikipedians who covered the 2005 UK election for Wikipedia comment at the New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board on what pages were set up and how the coverage on Wikipedia was organised. Any suggestions for improvements we could make to the process? Thanks in advance.-gadfium 03:00, 10 September 2005 (UTC) BBC ArchiveThe BBC have opened up an archive of material under the Creative Archive Licence ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4225914.stm )and initially I thought that this means that Wikipedia will be able to use the archive to create images for Wikipedia, however http://creativearchive.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/03/the_rules_in_br_1.html says "The Creative Archive content is made available to broadband users within the UK for use [primarily] within the UK" - so I don't think we can use the material. Jooler 19:06, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
It is a shame about the UK only restrictions, though they claim this is because of copyright problems they would face if they allowed these things outside the UK. Presumably the commercial problem is based on the wikipedia copyright releasing the material for commercial purposes as well, as we are not responsible for what others do with our product. I think wikipedia are right to release under a copyright that includes for commercial purposes, so we just have to resign ourselves, SqueakBox 23:15, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
I am sure it will be an IP address based restriction. I was not happy when they first announced UK restrictions to the programmes they were then still planning to release (possibly everything they broadcast), and they wrote back to me saying such a restriction was fundamentally because of copyright reasonsand changed their publicity (article) to reflect this fact. So no EastEnders for me (an ex pat)! On a side note MSN only let you watch their videos on IE or Netscape (ie not on Opera or Firefox), so the BBC aren't alone in introducing a restrictive policy, SqueakBox 23:48, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
The main reason for their geographical restriction, in the case of the Creative Archive, has little to do with copyright reasons. At the moment, the stuff they have is largely less copyright-sensitive, hence lots of wildlife clips (penguins don't have agents). It's more to do with the fact that the BBC is licence-fee funded, and they can't justify spending the licence fee on materials to be used too widely outside the UK. Silly, I know, but there you go. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:52, September 12, 2005 (UTC) Date articlesThis is probably as good a place as any to get the attention of editors who have their preferences set for the "22 August 1954" automagic date format. Here's the situation: All 366 date articles begin in a similar way:
Now, if you turn that date into a link ([[September 11]]), date display preference kicks in:
Just the display preference: doesn't make it a link because it's a self-link, and it doesn't appear as a self-link would because it's already bolded. So whenever I open a day-of-the-year article, I make a point of linking the date. People will see the date in the intro paragraph the way they like. Surely this is a Good Thing? Apparently not. One editor has taken to reverting me (on today's article and several surrounding ones), arguing that
The only one of those that gives me the slightest cause for concern is No. 3 but even then, (IMHO) the convenience of having one's chosen date format displayed overrides that. Í'd be interested in hearing other editors' opinions and, if anyone agrees with me and has both the inclination and a moment to spare, please re-link today's (and any others you come across) -- I've already used up my three reverts. Thanks. –Hajor 10:24, 11 September 2005 (UTC) Broadsheet obituariesJust thought I would flag up that for the last couple of weeks I've been maintaining a list of people who've had obituaries in UK newspapers. Any help filling in the red links (especially the ones in bold, who have had an obituary in more than one paper), greatly appreciated. (And yes, I know that as of today only one of them is actually a broadsheet). OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:59, September 12, 2005 (UTC) Congrats!Nichalp congratulates the English cricket team on regaining the Ashes. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:23, September 13, 2005 (UTC) England page, Scotland page, Wales page: National Arms or UK ArmsUser:Astrotrain is persistently trying to apply the UK Coat of Arms to the Scotland Page. When asked why he/she had chosen to remove Scotland's national arms, but not for example the three lions on the England page, they replied "I will not be removing the English 3 lions, since this is the only avaliable coat of arms to represent the country of England in a solitary capacity." This is clearly nonsense. The lion rampant is also "the only avaliable coat of arms to represent the country of Scotland in a solitary capacity." Why do we allow the Enland, Scotland and Wales pages to all show the flags of each respective country, but only Scotland is forced to have her Arms replaced by the Arms of the UK? If Scotland must display the UK Arms, then the three lions of England must go too, to be replaced by the UK Arms as used by the monarch when in England. Fair's fair. I do not want to remove England's national symbols from Wikipedia, but this seems to be a concerted campaign to remove Scotland's. I suggest as a compromise that we do not show the full royal arms of the former Kingdom of Scotland, but a simple shield with the lion rampant, in line with the simplicity of England's shield. (The Scottish Standard - lion rampant flag - used to be shown in that spot, as by far the most familiar use of the lion rampant to the Scottish public, but someone removed it some time ago.) However, it is worth pointing out that the Scotland page is also the page for the Kingdom of Scotland, whereas there are two separate pages called England and Kingdom of England. If anything, this makes it even more daft to remove Scotland's arms from a page about the Kingdom of Scotland.--Mais oui! 05:15, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Just popping up once again to say: the lion-rampant-in-the-border-flory-counterflory is not "not official" in the sense of "fictional" or "having no basis in law." Quite the reverse. Indeed, think about it this way: the Scottish Football Association's usurpation of those arms is technically illegal (although of course nobody cares) precisely because those arms exist. They are called "Scotland," as any herald will tell you. And they belong to HM the Queen. She doesn't use them on their own -- she uses them in conjunction with other arms -- but they do exist! Doops | talk 08:01, 16 September 2005 (UTC) Open House LondonOpen House London happens this weekend (17th and 18th September 2005). A chance to see inside 600 buildings in London, might be a source for some articles and photos. Edward 07:43, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Free access to Dictionary of National Biography onlinethis weekend only [13] Arnie587 21:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
|
![[11]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:QEI_arms.jpg){kind=link}