User talk:Roleplayer/Archive09

Extraordinary User page

		The Excellent Userpage Award
		I Award you this for your Extraordinary User page :-) Maen. K. A. (talk) 12:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Kinda sad

There are some articles that seem to be written, for lack of a better term, simply as a goof - kids with nothing better to do, people who think they are funny, etc. - and yet they can't be speedied! Postcard Cathy (talk) 22:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

British English at Richard Fairbrass

I have checked it, and the spelling's fine from a British English point of view. -- role^player 08:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! After making that edit, I actually thought "well gee, what if I had a British English spellcheck?" I now have a firefox addon (with a British English dictionary) so I can double-check such things myself in the future. --spazure (contribs) (review) 08:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I must get me one of those. I had to do it by reading it... -- role^player 10:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

12+

Hi Roleplayer,

The 12+ was replaced with the 11+ in 1997 (from memory and a quick bit of mental arithmatic, so could be one year out). The first year was a transition year where both systems operated in parallel so pupils could stay at primary school in year 7 and take the exam joining the secondary school in year 8. After this the 11+ system took over so year 7 is the first year of Secondary school across Bucks. There are still exams that can be sat run by Bucks for those coming into the area from outside to join in later years which may still be colloqually called 12+ I guess but there is no 12+ year of transfer. I too have been in Bucks education as a Governor so can check the dates if needs be. Good to exhcnage notes with a fellow Buckinghamshire adict! Tmol42 (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

The edit I reverted though referred to a 12+ process. Tmol42 (talk) 13:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes definitely knew it hadn't been abolished, because the school I work at is regularly used for the Aylesbury resits. I do know that the issue has recently been debated in the local press though: it is claimed that it is unfair. Personally I think the unfairness is a lot more widespread nationwide than just in Bucks - i.e. that children from wealthier backgrounds tend to do better at school, hence the population of Aylesbury (where there are fewer milionaires than in rural Bucks) doing less well academically. I think it was only about 16% of 11 year olds from Aylesbury who passed last year's 11+ exam, but don't quote me on that. Yes good to finally catch up with you! -- role^player 21:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Civil parishes - Eaton Bray

Like buses first none and then coming along in two's we seem to have two conversations on the go all of a sudden. I see your comment on Talk:List of places in Buckinghamshire re Eaton Bray. You got me thinking... Can a civil parish be in more than one local authority or even county then? I've always assumed without checking they have to be coterminus with the county boundary. I guess an ecclesiastical parish will often be like this. I am always a bit confused by such places as Woburn Sands or Wexham where the village has historically been across a boundary or over time has joined up with a nearby village and de facto extended across the boundary. Is Eaton Bray the same as these?Tmol42 (talk) 21:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes because of the acquisition of land it is even possible for a parish to have extraparochial land in a different county that has no border with the parish itself: this is how Coleshill was once upon a time in Hertfordshire even though it was completely surrounded by Buckinghamshire villages. Another weird parish boundary in Bucks was Prestwood, which has only been a parish in its own right since about the 1870s: prior to that it spanned the parish land of Great Hampden, Hughenden, Great Missenden... and Stoke Mandeville!!! I believe the legal term for it was a peculiar. So to have a parish spanning a county boundary was neither unusual nor uncommon. -- role^player 22:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info on Prestwood but as far as I could see / find it has never been a distinct civil parish of its own rather the village had been part of one or more ecclesiastical and subsequently civil parishes. On Coleshill the parish was surrounded by Bucks but wholly in Hertfordshire. What I was looking to resolve in my mind was if a single civil parish could be astride two counties. I don't think it can be at least in the 20th century or now rather what examples there are is where a village spreads out over two or occasionally three civil parishes and sometimes also across two district or two county councils. In the case of Wexham when it was reorganised the village was split between Bucks and Slough and a new civil parish created for each part. I guess before the advent of Sanitary Districts and their successors the parish was not an administrative division of a higher authority so the ecclesiastical parish could and did spread across boundaries Tmol42 (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The distinctions between types of parishes is something that has always confused me! Unfortunately I don't know anyone I can ask for examples either. -- role^player 11:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Locomotioners

Oh I didn't check for copyright. Good call. Does that now trump the prod? I wasn't sure if it was speediable otherwise. -- role^player 22:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. WP:PROD says the prod tag should be left on the page with the CSD tag. So i guess the prod tag is still as valid as the csd tag. Frehley 22:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

But the basic rule of thumb with PROD is once the user removes it, it stays removed or goes to afd. The creating user removed it when they also removed the speedy tag, and now they are contesting the speedy nomination on the talk page. -- role^player 22:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I guess we should just leave the CSD tag for now, i left the creating user a message on the articles talk page about the copyright problems and asked them to read WP:CONFLICT since they seem to be involved with the group. Frehley 23:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

OK I'll keep it on watchlist. -- role^player 23:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed speedy deletion tag: Zimbabwe Telegraph

Hi Roleplayer! I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on Zimbabwe Telegraph- because: the article makes a credible claim of importance or significance. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. decltype (talk) 22:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Mary's world

Mary's world can't be speedied because it has the sentence "Mary's World has had many quests and has really been successful around welsh towns." which is a claim of notability. It needs to be a prod. Iowateen (talk) 01:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The author has requested deletion by blanking the page. Iowateen (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I think there comes a time when claims to notability have to be proven to be believed, and when it comes to youtube videos and other web content, if there are no supporting links whatsoever they can be speedied quite quickly imo. Leaving them hanging around for a week because they've clearly made up a claim to notability seems a nonsense to me. -- role^player 01:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Zozo genchev

Well done on spotting the attack part of the page. I got as far as "Zozo Genchev works at Abbey College" and lost the will to live. -- role^player 23:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Lol. Thank you, and I completely understand. New page patrolling can be a headache sometimes. Wperdue (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Featured article

Hello,

I just wondered how one might get the Holmer Green article beyond it's B rating, perhaps even to Featured Article status? I'd appreciate any suggestions you may have as an accomplished Bucks Wikipedian!

Cheers

Proteus4 (talk) 20:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, although this may seem like a strange place to start, you can't go too far wrong looking at some of the existing featured articles for places, many of which are in the UK. Seeing what information there is about those places might help you to decide what needs to go into the Holmer Green article. -- role^player 20:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. Proteus4 (talk) 11:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Move from John Derbyshire/draft by the man himself to User:WhyDoIKeepForgetting/John Derbyshire

Hi, I have moved the draft you have been writing to your username space. In future please write all drafts in user space rather than main space, and then only move them once you are satisfied that they are no longer draft. Also please be aware of the potential conflict of interest issues when writing an article about yourself. Thank you. -- role^player 09:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

OK. Also, I am not John Derbyshire. I copied this article from a version of his article apparently written by him. WhyDoIKeepForgetting (talk) 09:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh OK. -- role^player 09:12, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Nele Luus

Heh. Thinking it might be Finnish wasn't too far off, then.  :) Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes I thought it looked distinctly Finnish when I first looked. Often you can guess at the language from the weblinks added at the bottom of the foreign language article, but unfortunately in this case there weren't any. -- role^player 22:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of London Rendezvous, Old Park Lane

A tag has been placed on London Rendezvous, Old Park Lane, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of London Rendezvous, Old Park Lane and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Karljoos (talk) 02:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't aware I had created it!!! -- role^player 09:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I can't find any independent source about this casino and the deletion request was not accepted. Could you help? Where can I find independet info about the casino? Cheers --Karljoos (talk) 14:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not really able to help. It's not my area of expertise, and before you alerted me to the fact it was nominated for deletion I didn't even remember that I had created it. Looking at the edits that I made either side of creating that article I was carrying out RC Patrol, and it's not normal behaviour for me to create something random in the middle of reverting bad edits. The only thing I can suggest is that there are some older nonsense edits that have since been deleted, making me appear to be the creator of someone else's article. -- role^player 20:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Service areas AfD

Since you expressed an opinion in the last AfD regarding UK service areas at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donington Park services, I'd like to inform you of a new AfD discussion which has recently been started by another user at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norton Canes services (2nd nomination). In the interests of keeping this within the rules regarding canvassing, I am sending this to everyone involved with that original debate, regardless of if they voted keep or delete, or if they appear to be active or inactive. Jeni ^(talk) 14:32, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Arquila INSIGHT

An article that you have been involved in editing, Arquila INSIGHT, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arquila INSIGHT. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. andy (talk) 15:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

You are aware that my involvement in the article was to nominate it for deletion, aren't you??? -- role^player 21:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Duh, yes! :) andy (talk) 22:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Wycombe Abbey deleted edits

I can understand why you have removed my edit on Wycombe Abbey stating that the school is more interested in academic achievement than pastoral care (although for your interest I still have the letter sent to my parents after my sister's attempted suicide at the school, stating that while they were sure that she had tried to kill herself, if they were to send her to another school she would not get into Oxford, that's some pastoral care). However the edit about the Junior House being known by all pupils and all Seniors as the Hospice is undeniably true and uncontroversial. The Junior House used to be housed in the same building as the medical unit, and the name has stuck. I am not sure how I could provide written evidence for this, since it is oral tradition, but everyone who knows the school calls the Hospice the Hospice, outside the brochure.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoemyeye (talk • contribs) 20:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you are correct in thinking that commenting on the pastoral care of the school from your own experience would be wrong. This is written from your own point of view, from a negative personal experience that you had with the school, and does not adhere to the neutral point of view that is essential to keep Wikipedia valued by the whole community. In terms of the naming of the Junior House yes it is fairly uncontroversial, though it would be best if you were able to find some reference to the name being used in verifiable sources. Uncontroversial edits you can add, however do not be surprised if someone comes along afterwards and asks you to verify your statement. Cheers, and best of luck! -- role^player 11:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of James Major

The article James Major has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I cannot see what is notable about this person other than being the son of a Prime Minister and being once married to a model, in another word, no independent form of notability. All reliable thrid party sources link to what I stated as the reason for deletion.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} 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. Donnie Park (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, you left me a message about the proposed deletion of the James Major article, however I did not create the artical that is currently there. The user that you may need to warn is BernardSumption (talk · contribs), who was the first user to turn the redirect that I created into an article. -- role^player 12:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the inconvience, it was the automated nomination thing posted it to you when I nominated it for PROD since you had the misfortune for being the one who piped the link. Donnie Park (talk) 02:49, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Hungarian/Bechevet

I was browsing wikipedia and I found the answer to your question about an hungarian marrying a Bechevet... Here is your answer:

Marianne Charlotte Joséphine de Csuzy de Csus-Puszta-Szent-Mihaly (abt 1848-1937) married Martin Harryet, comte de Béchevet (1842-1907) in Posen (29th january 1867)

They divorced (7th june 1901) Kids: Anne 1867-1943 Gisèle 1868-1944 Richard 1870

This is coming from a French Genealogic Database with restricted access but the information above seem to be accurate. Hope it is what you were looking for. 69.183.202.65 (talk) 04:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that information, it is very valuable to me. I have been very interested in finding out more about the fate of the Bechevet line since I discovered a couple of years ago that I am related to them via Martin's grandmother Elizabeth Alderton. This will definitely be going into my research notes for future reference.

Many thanks once again.

-- role^player 11:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I believe the historic route that runs through Risborough...

...is this one. Though neither are mentioned by name in each other's articles so I don't blame you for taking it out. -- role^player 16:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

In fact this document from the County Council is a guide to walks in the Princes Risborough area and mentions the Icknield Way in Risborough town centre. On page 3 there is a description of the history of the Icknield Way matching the description you took out of the article. -- role^player 16:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if you are referring to the Monks Risborough article. This edit [1] referred and linked to the Icknield Way. It's now further down the article and was unwikilinked, but I have rewikilinked it. Or perhaps you are referring to Princes Risborough. Google maps shows the route clearly if you are interested.

• Lower icknield way [2]

• Monks Risborough Icknield Way [3]

• Princes Risborough / Saunderton Icknield Way (look bottom left where it continues) [4]

Finereach (talk) 22:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I was referring to Princes Risborough. Waysider made an edit to take reference to the historic route out of the article so I reisnerted it with references. -- role^player 00:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

There are a number of points here. Firstly, I do not of course dispute that the Icknield Way is an ancient trackway between East Anglia and the South-West and that it may well have been a trade route in prehistoric times when the trade goods were probably flint tools and pottery. In fact I did not realise that the sentence I took out of the Princes Risborough article was referring to the Icknield Way - I had assumed that it referred to the road through Risborough and I did not believe that that had ever been a route (trading or not) between Cambridge and Dorset.

Secondly, the town of Princes Risborough is not "on" the Icknield Way. The Upper Icknield Way is about 1/4 to 1/2 a mile away and the Lower Icknield Way rather more on the other side of the town. This alone makes it unlikely that the existence of the ancient trackway in the vicinity had anything to do with the siting of the town where it actually is.

Thirdly, if the Icknield Way is meant, there is an anachronism here. The date of the Icknield Way is unknown but must be very early, somewhere between the 4th and 1st millennia B.C. I believe the name has no relation to any historic language and it probably takes us back to one of the unnknown languages being spoken in these islands long before the Romans came here. However the foundation of Princes Risborough as a village or a manor can hardly go back earlier than Anglo-Saxon times, probably between 600 and 800 A.D. The road and the town must be quite independent of each other. It would be appropriate to have a statement somewhere in the body of the article (not in the lead) describing how the Icknield Way passes through the parish and I will hope to add this later.

Fourthly, if one is referring to the road through the town, it does in fact come from West Wycombe through a gap or pass in the Chiltern Hills. Persons wanting to go from North to South or vice versa would soon have found a route which made it unnecessary for them to go up to the top of the hills and down again. That is the road in question (the railway takes the same route). At the northern end other roads would soon have branched out in different directions and the junction would be a natural place for a village to grow. I think that this is mentioned as a salient fact in the siting of the village in several books whichI have seen though the only one which I have to hand at the moment is Pevsner who starts the article on PR: "A small town in a gap in the Chilterns."

For all these reasons I would propose in due course to restore my amendment. I hope this will convince those interested that it is correct.

Waysider1925 (talk) 15:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Fine. Looking on a map, you're right - it goes nowhere near the town centre. By the way I remember reading somewhere once (though don't ask me where) that the word Icknield refers to the Iceni.

PS: re bordar/boarder, my apologies. -- role^player 16:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

From Talk:Patrick Carnegy II

As the 15th Earl of Northesk inherited his title through a line from the 2nd Earl not previously noted on Wikipedia, I'm attempting to show the exact chain of ancestry which leads to him. --Analog Kid (talk) 14:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Then show it on either of the notable individuals' pages. To have an article about them kept the individuals in question would require notability in their own right, which based on the information you have provided they do not have. -- role^player 15:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, that's fair enough. --Analog Kid (talk) 15:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you agree therefore to the deletion of the pages that I have tagged? -- role^player 15:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure. My attempt was merely to show the precise genealogical chain as per the other Earls. But as you say, if the requirement for inclusion is notability in their own right, then I guess there's not much to keep them there. I can respect that. I've made a notation on the second Earl's page (and deleted the link to his son, Patrick), I assume that's okay as is? --Analog Kid (talk) 15:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

That's brilliant, thank you. I'm sorry you had to find this out the hard way! -- role^player 15:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

That's okay. It's better that I find these things out now, so that I don't make mistakes in the future. Always learning. --Analog Kid (talk) 16:02, 1 April 2010 (UTC)