User talk:Voice of Clam/Archives/2007

Del Lagrace Volcano

hi tivedshambo. i am working on the article on del lagrace volcano. since there are some links in other articles to this name it seems at least a person not completely irrelevant. but i know i should improve respectively extend the content of the article! hermelina

Tag removed - though I see it the article has been deleted anyway - perhaps from lack of evidence of notability? – Tivedshambo 18:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

but why do they create links on this person in other articles if the person is so unimportant? s/he is actually very famous in the field she is working. what can i do if i want to keep the article without doing to much research on my own? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hermelina (talk • contribs) 18:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Just ensure you include some information about what makes the subject notable - see WP:N for guidelines. Include links to other websites, preferably not just the subject's own website. Don't worry if it looks untidy - other users will help to improve the article. – Tivedshambo 20:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

sean hewitt

Hi, Sorry for any inconvenience caused with this article. please can you delete/tell me how to delete images Nino Sage.png, Shewitt.jpg and Shewittthumb.jpg as there is no point keeping them. Sorry again, Infernoradio 17:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The easiest way is to edit the image pages adding the following tag:

{{db-self}}

(including the curly brackets). This will alert an administrator to the fact that you wish your own work to be deleted. – Tivedshambo 17:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Template talk:PotentialVanity

I'd like to propose deleting this template, as he word "vanity" can be considered defamitory (see WP:COI#Importance_of_civility). The template {{COI}} can be used instead. Anyone have any thoughts on this before I put it to WP:TFD? – Tivedshambo (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

You are correct, go for it. >Radiant< 12:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Owain.wilson's copyvios

Hey Tivedshambo, thanks for letting us know on ANI about the copyvios. I've deleted all the articles and rolledback the definitions he pasted into other articles. I think I've got them all. :/ Thanks for spotting them, tagging etc. All the best, Sarah 19:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Sarah. – Tivedshambo 20:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Free representation unit

Im not exactly clear why a train station is any more important or relevant then london's oldest pro bono charity. please explain.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dfutter (talk • contribs) 21:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

See the following:-

• WP:ORG - notability for organisations
• User:Mangoe/Railroad line and station articles - proposed guidelines for articles about stations.

If you feel your article is notable, feel free to resubmit it, but please include something to state why it is notable, even if it just emphasises the fact that it is London's oldest charity. Ideally, this should include relevent sources as evidence. – Tivedshambo 22:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Follow-up - as this article now has references and evidence of notability, I have removed it form the speedy deletion category. – Tivedshambo 22:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Gair o ddiolch (Mallwyd)

Thanks for the release of image copyright (Mallwyd waterfalls). I hadn't realised there might be a problem there, just quickly copied the low res image. Diolch yn fawr a hwyl, 'Anatiomaros' (cy.wikipedia). 88.111.218.158 14:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC) (just popping in - and out!)

Moulsford Railway Bridge

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank-you for your article about Moulsford Railway Bridge. I've tidied it up a bit to bring it up to some basic standards (known as wikifying). Do you have any more information about this bridge? For example, which line is it on, and is it still in use? Also, are there any external websites about it that can be listed?

By the way, to link to another article in Wikipedia, enclose the article in double square brackets, e.g. [[Isambard Kingdom Brunel]]. Don't worry about making mistakes - there's a lot to learn but I hope you enjoy your time on Wikipedia. If you want to ask me anything, leave a message here within the next few days, or on my talk page.– Tivedshambo (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the the comments and edits - I was midway through when you posted your comments, so apologies for having saved "live" before completion. I'm afraid I'm not aware of any external sites mentioning the bridge. I'll try and get a photo shortly.

Sciencebloke 13:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

stn art lrnk

Thank you for keeping a level head and making clear arguments. I've been at a loss for words, and my arguments for keeping this template have suffered. You've reduced my Wikimood to near-positive numbers! M0RHI | Talk to me 08:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Cross City

Great work adding the WP:TRAIL railway template to the Birmingham Cross-City Line, but would you mind separating the Church Road and Moseley Tunnels, as I'm not sure which is the camp hill line, thanks. Dannyboy3 21:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Done! – Tivedshambo (talk) 17:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Removal of part of talk page

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia talk:Railway line template‎. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.  – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I saw it in the history. I have no idea how it could happen. I just wanted to add a simple comment. HandigeHarry 13:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It happened to me the other day, on the same page. I'll report it as a bug. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

As you can see in the Edit summary, I edited a single paragraph, not the entire page. So how could the entire page be damaged? I am sure this is not my fault. HandigeHarry 13:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Fault reported on Wikipedia:Help desk. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Access symbols

I appreciate your comment about the recent change. I was unaware of the ICTA's guidelines for the symbol, therefore I resorted to using the PD symbol Image:wheelchair.svg which is an entirely free image. I think it would be a good idea if you could cite the ICTA's policies on the image's page with a website or something so that we are all aware of how it can be used. If the ICTA allows usage of the symbol on Wikipedia despite its copyright, I think that that the PD symbol should be deleted as it is unnecessary. Unfortunately, that image is currently used in literally hundreds of articles, so a bot would be required if any changes were made. I think you should contact User:NE2 (creator of the PD symbol) about this so we can come to a consensus. I hope you don't feel that I was taking authority by removing the symbols, as I was only doing what has been done to all other articles which use the symbol. –Crashintome4196 21:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Midland Main Line template

Can I invite you to a discussion on the future of this template, and the possibility of creating two template from this one at Template talk:Midland Main Line. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 18:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

International wheelchair symbol discussion

A discussion concerning how we should use International Symbol of Access on Wikipedia is taking place at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Use of international wheelchair symbol. You are welcome to participate. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 17:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:A_Walk_around_the_Snickelways_of_York.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:A_Walk_around_the_Snickelways_of_York.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ↔NMajdan•talk 16:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Done! – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Your question concerning the motorway-symbols

Hello, did you read my answer? You haven't replied, so I don't know. --MdE ^{talk (de) (en)} 18:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I did read your answer. I see the symbols have been restored to WP:TRAIL, and as they don't seem to be causing any further controversy I assumed the matter had been resolved. – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Duplicates

Can you substitute on your subpages all svg-images for railwaydiagrams, which are duplicates, with the other one ? that will be nice. You can find them here. The filenames start with "BSicon" and contain the substring "STB" somewhere behind. Thank you. 84.150.215.245 12:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

They are there to show that they are duplicates - listed next to the alternatives. This is to help me locate and destroy the duplicates. (I'll add a column header to show this) – Tivedshambo (talk) 12:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I've commented out the section for the time being - it was only sandbox stuff anyway. – Tivedshambo (talk) 12:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Malcolm Pryce

I've reverted your edits to Malcolm Pryce - you have fallen (quite understandably) into the trap of assuming the other books you added are by the same author. However according to http://www.malcolmpryce.com/impostor.html there is a second author with the same name. It is possible that M.P. is trying to distance himself from his earlier work, but I can find no evidence of this. – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for the welcome, and correcting my mistake on the non-Louie novels! I did indeed fall into the Amazon.co.uk search on "malcolm pryce" mistake, and saw they were all Welsh based, so leapt to the conclusion they were the same author.

Your correction to the article is nicely done, anyway - the "not to be confused bit" and the link to the distancing from the other author.

86.144.170.33 20:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

How does the List of Merchant Navy Locomotives look now?

Hopefully I've cured some of the issues you have raised. Cheers.--Bulleid Pacific 13:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I've put the title in bold as per WP:LEAD, otherwise it's fine. – Tivedshambo (talk) 17:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Railway station coordinates

Hi,

I have just reverted a number of your edits, to railway station articles, where you have replaced coordinates with OSGB grid references. The use of coordinates ensures that the page is included in the Google Earth layer for Wikipedia. Using {{coord}} (which will soon replace the coor family of templates; and which is already used by the UK railway station template) to display them adds a Geo microformat; and coordinates are better understood, than OS references, by readers outside the UK. I have also edited your addition to the usage notes for the relevant template, because the use of coordinates vs. OSGB is not an "either/or" choice - both can be used, side-by-side, with no ill-effects. If you decide to re-add the OSGB refs., please do not overwrite the coordinates again. Thank you. Andy Mabbett 12:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've reinstated the OSGB refs as above. In the longer term, are there any plans to enable the coord template to handle OSGB refs? Or alternatively add Geo microformat to the existing OSGB templates? – Tivedshambo (talk) 22:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that either would be practicable. Andy Mabbett 22:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

ECML templates

I am not sure which you would add to the notices on the article. There is both Template:East Coast Main Line and Template:ECML article. I am thinking of doing a "WCML article" template as well. Simply south 17:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I designed {{BS template}} to enable users to locate templates used within the article, therefore Template:ECML article applies in this case, as this is the one used within East Coast Main Line. Template:East Coast Main Line is used in other articles. These should have {{BS template|East Coast Main Line}} added to their talk pages at some point, but I haven't got round to that yet. – Tivedshambo (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Whilst we are on the subject of the notices, sorry Tivedshambo about my mistake earlier in editing the wrong template in order to try and get rid of the gap. I've changed the West Midlands template a bit more just now and it seems to have solved the problem. Adambro 17:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry - I assumed it was something technical but unrelated you were doing. I substed the {{info}} template to create it, but I didn't try to work out how the code works. – Tivedshambo (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Most of this was redundant code anyway, for options within {{info}} which are not required for this template. I've now removed it. – Tivedshambo (talk) 06:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Lee Valley Lines map query

Do you know the names of the junctions and distances of them on what i've updated on the map?

Also, There wasn't enough space to add South Tottenham railway station on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line to the same template as the junctions i've added are either side of this station. Do you think this matters? Simply south 18:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you add South Tottenham by putting it in vertically? Bring the line from Gospel Oak in, bend it west to south, add the station, then take it out north to east? The junctions will need rearranging around it. I'll have to look up the names and distances of the junctions - possibly next week now. – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have added the Junction names and i also redid Coppermill Junction. Simply south 11:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

By the looks of it, Canterberry has added the distances, at least on the Lea Valley Lines. Do you think they should be added for the GOBLIN? Simply south 13:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that would just be too confusing, as South Tottenham is also around the 6 mile post, but measured from Gospel Oak. As (I believe) there is only one train a day which uses this route, I don't think the distance matters. What I might do, though, is re-position the rows so that each station is at the correct position in relation to distance from London - at present the distances on the Chingford branch seem out of step. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you think the Hertford East Branch should be added to this? A note about it is that it is its own separate line but also a continuation of at least the services of the Lea Valley Lines. It it also located in the Lea Valley. Simply south 13:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that discussion would be better on the relevant talk page - I'm neutral on that suggestion! – Tivedshambo (talk) 14:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Wombourne Branch Line

I've changed the map at the Wolverhampton end so that it shows the line heading to Wolverhampton Low Level, rather than High Level. Could you just check and make sure that it's OK? I've not edited one before, so it would be nice to know if I've done it correctly.

Also, I've added in the modern loop towards Bushbury Junction between Low Level and Dunstall Park. This loop was only built in the 1990s to replace Cannock Road Junction to the south in order that trains would not need to reverse - but it means that the track though Dunstall Park is still in use (if somewhat infrequently!). Fingerpuppet 11:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I've done some more tweaking, to show the parallel route into High Level, also the original curve from Low Level to Stafford. It could possibly do with some explanation that not all routes were open at the same time - e.g. that it was not possible to run from High Level to Wombourne as the High Level to Shrewsbury connection only opened (as far as I know) when Low Level closed.

Incidentally, the direct curve to Stafford must have opened before the 1990's as I travelled over it ona diverted service once in the late 1980's. – Tivedshambo (talk) 02:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The High Level - Shrewsbury line was open prior to 1968 - services originally ran to High Level before the opening of Low Level between 1849 and 1854 - though prior to 1852 (and the opening of High Level) the service ran to a temporary station just to the north of Broad Street. Additionally, GWR's Herbert Street Goods Station (parallel to Great Western Street) was just to the north of High Level.

It's possible that the curve was added in the late 1980s - the 1990s date was dredged out of my memory - which is always a dangerous thing! Fingerpuppet 04:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, is there a way of showing proposed stations on those routemaps - I'm thinking that Brinsford Parkway could be added to Rugby-Birmingham-Stafford Line, along with all the closed stations on that line. Fingerpuppet 04:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Gwylliaid Cochion Mawddwy

Hi

I have added a few suggested alterations to the article in square brackets. I hope this is clear. Rhion 18:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Primate clades Copyright infringement notice

Please see my comments in the article talk back. Regards, Mattjs 20:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

ISA

The ISA addition is not a consensus addition, and is at odds with Foundation policy. There isn't anything close to showing a consensus to using that image other than a discussion of flawed arguments and blind speculation. We do not change such an important policy based on that. -- Ned Scott 06:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Define "flawed". There were good and bad arguments on both sides, but the majority of arguments seem to be in favour. – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a democracy. -- Ned Scott 07:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

No, it works by consensus. When is the consensus not the majority? – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

By the way, please remember WP:3RR – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

"When is the consensus not the majority?" When it's a Foundation policy. Enforcing such policy appears to be exempt from the 3RR. -- Ned Scott 07:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is unfortunately in my opinion a tyranny of the majority so when you guys finish arguing I'd like an answer on my Primate clades talk back comments. I am in the enviable (and rare Wikipedia) position (indeed) of being in the wonderful position of a majority of one over there at the moment and so I am of course sensiblely endevouring to make the absolute most of it! ;-) Regards, Mattjs 19:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't help you I'm afraid, as I have no knowledge of Primate Clades, other than it's a copyvio. I tried reading it, but phrases like "molecular and morphological phylogenetic hypotheses" without explanation just made my brain melt.

As far as ISA goes, I've stepped back and left the bickering to others, then I'll go in at the end and try to pick up the pieces. Ho hum... – Tivedshambo (talk) 19:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Narrow gauge railway vs. Narrow guage railways

I hate to say this after all your hard work, but moving links from narrow gauge to Narrow gauge railway in various articles has merely swapped one redirect for another. The actual destination is Narrow gauge railways (plural). If you like, I'll be willing to change the links, unless there's some reason not to. Alternatively, could Narrow gauge railways be moved to Narrow gauge railway? At present, there seems to be an almost equal split, with about 100 pages linking to railway and 100 to railways.  – Tivedshambo (talk) 06:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that. Actually, I'm in the process of resolving this: the article should be named Narrow gauge railway (singular) per the manual of style. I'm going to move it there in a while, but in the meantime I'm continuing the redirect correction to the singular version. The original move to Narrow gauge railways (plural) was a mistake. Gwernol 08:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for Removing 'Plague' in my 'Wikiism'

I was a bit iffy on my Wikification of the Brij Bhushan Kabra article. Thanks for giving me the heads-up on policy. I had the impression that Wikification of material amounts to a paraphrase. And if I say outright that it's copypasted...so pardon my plagarism. I appreciate your work.Elliotb2 21:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Wolverhampton and Walsall Railway

Great article! I've updated the RBS template to try to show more accurately where it joined. As far as I can see (from your article and from this map) it left the existing Walsall-Wolverhampton line after it diverges from the RBS line. IS this correct? I've also tweaked the Oxley chord to show it going under the RBS line.

I think the line must have closed in the 1970s, not 1980s. It's shown in my 1970 rail atlas, but the first edition of the Baker atlas, published in 1977, only shows a short siding at Wolverhampton, and the line only going from Walsall to Birchills power station at the other end. – Tivedshambo (talk) 09:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words!

The RBS map looks much better after your alterations - thank you. The actual location of the junctions is very odd. The lines appear to run parallel to one another (in a four track arrangement) until the LNWR's Loop Line diverges to the south just west of Heath Town. However, there was no junction between those lines until they are virtually at High Level itself, which is why I placed the layout how I did. On a geographical reference, your map is more accurate than mine, although as the track layout was, mine is more accurate! Personally, I prefer your version - it gives a better idea to anyone learning about the line, and is how I've shown it on the article itself.

On the subject of the RBS map - how do you feel about adding all the closed stations to it?

As for the closure of the line, it happened in stages (which I really ought to correct the article with!) The line near to Bentley station was removed due to the construction of the M6 motorway, although the line at the western end to just beyond Wednesfield and at the eastern end as you describe remained open for goods traffic to the relevant industrial areas, though such traffic was light.

I also have more research to do regarding the station closures. Pretty much all available resources state that the stations were all closed by 1931, but I have A-Z type mapping from the 1960s showing certain stations (Wednesfield and Willenhall Stafford Street) as being open. It's all quite peculiar... Fingerpuppet 10:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any problem with adding closed stations. I've added some closed lines, and it gives a clear description of the smaller communities that used to have rail access. – Tivedshambo (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Probably a dead topic now but I thought I'd chip in and add that there's entire categories of closed railway lines and stations in Victoria, Australia, among other places. There's no problem with such articles existing so long as they're referenced. Orderinchaos 08:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

My Memory of God's Wonderful Railway

Hi, just read your aticle and glad to see you are working on this subject. There were four empty houses across from my school on Stourport Road in Bewdley which were used in the filming. I remember seeing them decked out in 1940's regalia. I was 18 at the time, my parents ran a caravan site in Northwood Lane, Bewdley, where the director and some of the film crew stayed. I was asked to be an extra in a small part of the film. I think the director's name was Caroline Sharpe, but I'm not entirely sure. Will look forward to seeing more on this article. (User:blackbrooke15 00:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC))

coord

I have attempted to explain what it all means at the coord talk page. Technical people (and I'm guilty of this as anybody) have a bad habit of dropping into programming jargon when discussing with each other, but this is important enough that I think it needs a clear explanation - so I hope I haven't insulted your intelligence in the explanation, as it was aimed at anyone who might be curious and wants to know whether or which to apply. For the record, I am using coord in any new work as it's clear that it's *going* to be fully accepted given time, and it is better than the old range. Most of my arguments on that page have been along the lines of making sure that it's done *right*. Orderinchaos 02:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Scarborough North Bay Railway

Hi - what are your reasons for deleting references to the Cleethorpes Light Railway in this article? – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the North Bay Railway, was now operating seperately from the Cleethorpes Coast (a seperate operating company having been set up) - at least, that's what the leaflets I have been handing out at work for the past two months seem to imply! If that is not the case, I will gladly leave the article alone :) Svitapeneela 10:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll revert this page again - please do not keep changing it (whether logged on or anonymously). – Tivedshambo (talk) 23:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

As you will see - I have not altered it again "logged on or anonymously" since you originally warned me. I do not change anything anonymously - if the same IP address appears, it could be anybody who has access to SBC's shared network. Svitapeneela 15:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

If the anonymous edits weren't you then I apologise - I'd assumed they were as they made the same changes. I'll put a message on the IP in question and also on the article's talk page. – Tivedshambo (talk) 15:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Image licensing

I presume from this discussion that this is in general more restrictive than we allow. It is somewhat misleadingly named as a "GFDL extension" too, as it does not extend the rights granted by GFDL, but actually restricts them. For this reason, I propose that <includeonly>{{db-noncom}}</includeonly> is added to the tag. I thought it best I consult you before doing so, though. 81.104.175.145 15:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

This has already been discussed with an admin - see User:Tivedshambo/Archives/2006d#Your railway images. The conversation you discussed was when I had no commercial use at all - I changed this in light of that discussion. Please read User:Tivedshambo/Commercial images - I am not restricting use, just requesting that I am informed of any commercial use. This is similar to what User:Fir0002 adds to his pictures, many of which are featured including today's picture of the day, and I have seen no query about these. Incidentally, User:Tivedshambo/GFDL+ is a user page, not a template, therefore please do not make any changes to it with my permission. Many thanks. – Tivedshambo (talk) 15:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed this issue a while ago and it seems it has yet to be resolved. You have uploaded some very good photos that add greatly to articles but I'm afraid I must agree with the concerns raised, your GFDL+ licence is not valid. As Wikipedia:Non-free content says "we do not accept material [released under] a license exclusively for non-commercial usage". Comparing it to the notice used by User:Fir0002 is misleading as there is not a restriction of use of the image.

GFDL+ violates policy because is does not allow commercial use without permission. This means your images can be speedy deleted under CSD I3. I do not want to do this, nor do I want to see the images replaced by thumbnails. For these reasons I ask that you reconsider your opinions on licensing and remove the GFDL+ notice. I would suggest that GFDL on its own is offers enough protection against commercial use of your images. This is because GFDL requires that when the material is used a copy of the licence, a quite substantial document, must be included. This is likely to be too high a burden in most situations and so will greatly limit use of your images. Regards. Adambro 17:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The above and your stated position of not relaxing the restriction being the case, I will make the changes. As an image copyright tag, it is still invalid regardless of its location. 81.104.175.145 17:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I would ask that 81.104.175.145 does not make any changes whilst this discussion is still ongoing. My comments are not an endoresement of any such action. Adambro 17:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

From Tivedshambo's response, I'd say the discussion is pretty much over, don't you? 81.104.175.145 17:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting, Adambro. I've added some clarification to User:Tivedshambo/GFDL+ which will hopefully prevent further misunderstanding. – Tivedshambo (talk) 08:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry but your edits do not address the concerns I have raised. GFDL+ is a non-commercial licence because it does not allow commercial use without "explicit permission". I'm also slightly concerned by the restriction on editing the image. Again I would suggest it is misleading to compare it to User:Fir0002's note on his image pages. He does not restrict use of his images whatsoever beyond those restrictions of the GFDL. The note simply offers more relaxed licensing subject to negotiations. This note probably relates to the burdensome nature of the GFDL in using images in print media as I mentioned previously. It seems that Fir0002 considers that the GFDL is enough to protect his images, I would ask that you do so too. Adambro 09:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

This would certainly appear to be correct. That provision is to allow commercial publishers the option of printing the image unencumbered by the requirements of GFDL. Yours does not - it explicitly prevents commercial use under any circumstances without your explicit permission, which is very unwiki. If commercial use of "freely donated work" (which of course isn't "freely donated" if you are restricting its use) gets you down, you could go into the business of selling your pictures to commercial publishers. If the problem is as great as you suggest, you should have no trouble finding someone wanting to publish them. 81.104.175.145 12:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please hold fire on this while I look into the options more closely. – Tivedshambo (talk) 12:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Chase Line.png

Hi - I see you've requested that this image is converted to SVG format. Do you know of any conversion software that can do this - either from the current PNG, or from the original Microstation DGN format (which can be exported as an AutoCad file if necessary)? I suspect it would be easier from Microstation or AutoCad, as these are vector based rather than the PNG raster based. I did find some Microstation to SVG software once, but as it costs over $500, I wasn't going to buy it!

The same conversion can also be said of the other railway maps I created - see User:Tivedshambo/Gallery#Diagrammatic railway maps – Tivedshambo (talk) 15:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any info on Microstation DGN to SVG conversion other than what I can google up in a minute or two. Converting from PNG automatically is not really feasible. It would probably be more reliable to reconstruct the route maps in Inkscape. One possibility you may want to consider is printing/exporting the DGN to postscript. Then the postscript can be converted to SVG with a tool like pstoedit (there are others out there, but that is the one I've been using). I hope this is helpful. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Hangon on image deletion

I'm hanging on as requested - I'm sure as someone who appears very knowledgeable about image rules, you can tell why these images are being removed? Neil ╦ 12:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

As explained above, I disagree with the charge of non-com. However, I've also said that I'll look into it. Unfortunately, an unregistered user has ignored me and tagged these images anyway. I'll give further explanation tonight - I'm too busy at present. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I've asked the IP editor to hold off on tagging any more images til this is resolved - as far as can tell, you have two options - 1) Release the images under GFDL, and they can be kept (I'll gladly restore any that are already deleted) or 2) Insist on retaining a non-commercial licence over them, and they will all have to be deleted.

The current licencing status is "free, but any commercial use must be authorised by me" - this is not free under the terms of GFDL. Your images do retain protection under GFDL, but your "GFDL+" licence is a non-commercial licence. I'll check back in later to see what you say. Neil ╦ 13:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please restore the images - I've struck out GFDL+ and will remove the tag in due course. I may request the images deleted myself and replace them with low-res free versions, but I'll need the originals so I can copy the information from them. Thanks. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll restore them post haste. Neil ╦ 13:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll sort things out this evening. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

All restored, I think, although I only did it by going through my own deletion log - if any were missed (ie, if another admin deleted them), let me know (here or on my talk page). Neil ╦ 13:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Welland Viaduct history merge with Harringworth Viaduct

Hi - I've performed the merger of the two pages. We have a special page, WP:SPLICE, for listing these things if you need another one in the future. Let me know if you have questions or need help! - KrakatoaKatie 03:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Is it worth listing WP:SPLICE in WP:RAA as I looked for a page like this without success? – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

As I said, Rutlanders refer to Welland Viaduct as Seaton Viaduct. The short one you mention is not prominent enough to warrant a name for most people. A quick google confirms frequent references to Seaton Viaduct (and a few to North Seaton Viaduct in Co. Durham). A firm early source for the title is this 1904 postcard [1] Ned de Rotelande 07:29, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Good reference - well found! I'll add a footnote to the page to avoid future confusion. – Tivedshambo (talk) 11:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps i'm taking this a little too seriously.......................................

Perfect contender on short run Butetown Branch Line (unless spiced up like other). Simply south 11:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Presumably you mean like Stourbridge Town Branch Line? I'll see what I can do... :-)  – Tivedshambo (talk) 11:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Done! – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian Association of Canterbury, Inc. (EAC)

I'm not too familiar with notability guidelines with respect to organizations, but Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) indicates that organizations are notable if they are mentioned in independent secondary sources. I Googled some of the organizations listed in Category:Non-profit organisations based in Australia (couldn't find one for New Zealand) and some appear to have the same degree of coverage, though Googling by itself may not necessarily be sufficient to determine notability. One of the sites that link to this organization is a NZ government site [2] if this helps at all. — Zerida 23:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

This may be the case, but there is no evidence of this in the article. WP:ORG clearly states "Ultimately, and most importantly, all content must be attributable". The only links stated are to the organisation's own website, plus a link to another Wikipedia page (which should not be labelled as external). If you can provide additional links, feel free to do so and remove the {{PROD}}. – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Re. [3]; any links I find are simply those that come up when you google the organization. As I mentioned, however, website links by themselves may not be enough to establish notability or lack thereof. It's a local organization that caters to a small community. But regardless, I don't think PROD is the proper channel to make that decision, so you may want to put it up for AFD if you feel strongly about this particular article. — Zerida 19:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it's borderline now, so I'm not going to take it to AfD. This is why I prefer PROD - it can act as a warning that the article may be deleted if action isn't taken, but it can be easily removed when things are improved. With AfD, the whole process has to be seen to the conclusion. – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello Tivedshambo and Zerida, I strongly disagree with the following: 1- the notability of the EAC as it is indeed serves the Egyptian community in NZ and maintains a strong communications and contacts with the all levels of the NZ government plus many public and private organisations. 2- Indeed the links do not point except to the website, however its expansion is easy to achieve. 3- the claim that http://www.eac.org.nz/ola.asp is copyrighted is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. This link states the purpose and objectives of the EAC which are public domain provided in the publicly registered constitution of the EAC. Would you please help in rectifying the current blanking of the EAC article? Baher 11:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

All websites, including the EAC site, are assumed to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise on the site. This is not the case, therefore I totally agree with the copyvio tag. – Tivedshambo (talk) 14:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)''

Done thanks! Baher 01:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Fishguard Harbour

When I said it was "irrelevant", I meant irrelevant to an encyclopaedia, rather than irrelevant to the station. 81.104.175.145 17:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

This is an important fact about the station and its locality, and therefore encyclopaedic. – Tivedshambo (talk) 17:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Precisely how is the presence of a 15mph speed limit across a level crossing an "important fact about the locality"? 81.104.175.145 18:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Because it affects the way trains use the station. It is unusual enough to be commented on. – Tivedshambo (talk) 00:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

But why is that relevant to the encyclopaedia? Lots of stations have such low speed limits across them (25mph at Reading, 15mph at Cardiff Central, 20mph IIRC at King's Cross). I wasn't aware that Wikipedia was suddenly a compendium of information for train drivers. 81.104.175.145 18:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right. I'm inclined to keep it for the above reasons, but I can't really get worked up enough to go to edit war about it. – Tivedshambo (talk) 21:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

erm..

Just to let you know.... Wikipedia: is not main namespace.... GeorgeMoney (talk) 05:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

My bad - I assumed CSD R2 applied to all non-user namespaces. Personally I believe it should, and I see this category is already being discussed for expansion. See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#CSD R2. – Tivedshambo (talk) 11:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Need help formating a reference for article

Hello I found your username on the talk page for Fearns_Sports_College. I came across the article and was trying to help improve it. However, when trying to add a reference to a section I came across a problem. I am unable to get it to format correctly. If possible could you take a look at it? It is the only referrence for in the article, and it is a small article, so it shouldn't be too hard to find. I appreciate your help.WacoJacko 22:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, if possible, if you reply could you do it on my talk page. It is easier for me to keep track of that way. Thanks!WacoJacko 23:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for fixing the reference, I appreciate it!!WacoJacko 11:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Fearns Sports College

Also, do you think the Fearns Sports College article still needs the advert notice? It has been improved somewhat, and made to sound less like an advertisement. For example including results from the school inspection and also taking out any POV words/statements. I did not create the article, but originaly stumbled across looking for vandalism. However, I decided to try to clean it up a bit.(if you can call it that)WacoJacko 11:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I've responded on your talk page as requested. – Tivedshambo (talk) 19:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the help, I appreciate it!WacoJacko 11:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Miniature park

Hi. You have written a text at Talk:Miniature park which you propose for adding to that article. What's the reason you haven't added it yourself? -*Ulla* 20:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Because it was over a year ago, when I was new to Wikipedia, and I didn't know any better! – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Lampworking page - thank you for volunteering.

I have responded in the article's talk page. I am looking forward to your opinion. DrippingGoofball 01:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, are you busy with other tasks? If you are, please let me know, and I will re-post the 3OP request again. DrippingGoofball 14:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I've been awaiting a reply from Pschemp. If nothing more is forthcoming, I'll give my opinions later tonight (BST). – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for actually making the changes! I trust your opinion on the matter. I am leaving in 6 hours to fly across the continent to the Pilchuck Glass School for 3 weeks, YAY! So I won't have much time for the Wiki until I return. DrippingGoofball 02:07, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wdogart.jpg

If the Amazon image meets the appropriate criteria, than replacement quoting the FULL URL to the amazon page as the source, with the current or extended rationale would seem to be a compromise position. I leave it to you todecide if doing so would fall within policy on 'fair-use' ShakespeareFan00 22:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Done – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to 3O

Hello there. I saw your post at DrippingGoofball's talk page about the 3O that you offered. If you have any questions about the 3O system or need assistance relating to it, you're welcome to ask at the project's talk page and one of us will be glad to help. Thanks for contributing to the project. Regards, Adrian M. H. 14:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

SR West Country and Battle of Britain Classes

Hello. I'm wondering whether you would like to peer review the article SR West Country and Battle of Britain Classes in anticipation of submitting for FA status. Any feedback you give would be of great help and gratefully received. If you wish to do so, then this is the page for you to leave comments on:

• Wikipedia:Peer review/SR West Country and Battle of Britain Classes

Also, I understand you are having a few problems regarding Fishguard Harbour. As a resident of that locality, I encourage you to continue your evident interest in Pembrokeshire's railway history. Cheers, --Bulleid Pacific 21:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Jonathan Bellman

I added the article, since I know him, and he's referred to with a potential link at New Musicology. Now, I'm not a veteran page creator, and perhaps the page I made for him was not in accordance with accepted protocols. But Bellman's work makes him significant enough for a page, I think. I'd appreciate it if you would comment specifically on how the page can be emended to make it acceptable.Judd 20:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Add evidence of notability. Bear in mind conflicts of interest if you know the person concerned – it may be better to leave the article to be written by someone with a neutral point of view – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I have edited to improve the notability quotient; and I'll touch base with the original citer (MSCuthbert) to see if he can add further.Judd 21:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate it!

Thanks, you know I have to admit I make it up as I go along. I saw that that was an article, and I was like, "Shit!"; so thanks, much obliged. Do I delete that redirect or is that what keeps it a user page? þ 20:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

- Never mind I see you took care of it, thanks again. þ 20:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Pop princess closure

I redirected instead because it's practically the same as delete, except you are re-targeting for the convenience of readers. I could have deleted the article, but there were no objections to a redirect. Do you have one now? Sr13 06:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation - I'm not objecting, as I said I'm just trying to undertand the process better. – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you teach me how to redirect

Could you teach how me how to redirect. I see that I created a separate user page for my template; User:Mystic. I'll see if I can fix it myself. Thanks. þ 23:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

- It seems like we never end up having a two way conversation; and I always end up saying nevermind. lol. Anyway "nevermind", I fixed it. lol! þ 23:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Newark North Gate

Bus Picture → Will do, in a second.

Also, all i know was that it was there earlier than 1903, and it was probably LNER who owned it... ACBestAutograph Book 21:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hwyl

Hwyl! Deb 21:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: References header section.

Thank you for your reply. As far as I can tell, the header section contains information that has been repeated within the text itself, and as such, is referenced there. Having had a look at the example of a recent FA you gave me, there is only one footnote, which contains no reference material, and from looking at various FAs, there are few which contain references in the header section. Any further help to clarify the situation would be gratefully received. Thanks, --Bulleid Pacific 09:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply...

RE: SR West Country and Battle of Britain Classes. I think I have added enough references to the header to break up the chunks of information. It also needed expanding a bit to take into account its place in British Railway history, which I have added also to the article itself with references. Is there anything else you believe should be added/removed from the article?--Bulleid Pacific 12:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Stourbridge Branch

I have responded to your query on both the Talk page for the branch and on WP:RDT. --Stewart 21:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Please stop adding {{db-bio}} to this article. I agree that the author should not be continually removing it, but there is a claim for notability here, therefore db-bio is not applicable. In future, if you disagree with the removal of the template, you can use {{tl:drm-speedy}} on the author's talk page. If you want to delete this article, I suggest you take it to WP:AFD instead. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I did warn the user on his talk page; if he felt the article deserved to stay, he should have added {{hangon}} to the article, rather than removing the speedy template. I also fail to see how, exactly, the person in question is notable. ≈ The Haunted Angel 13:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I did not say he was notable, merely that there is a claim for notablity: ie. that he won a medal at the rowing world cup. Read WP:CSD#A7. – Tivedshambo (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Noted, and I have made an AFD claim. ≈ The Haunted Angel 13:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Kertész

Sorry - I mistook this edit as vandalism, as it seemed to be removing refs without reason. I should have checked the history. Please accept my apologies. – Tivedshambo (talk) 19:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Over- can be as troublesome as under-referencing .Circeus 19:08, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:CSD

Hi - what is your reason for this edit? – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The page originally had no content as in it just contained external links which is grounds for a speedy deletion. So I requested it to be speedy deleted, but you managed to userfy it at the same time. So I deleted that csd as it was a userfied page. But the original page still had the links/external links so I requested that to be speedy deleted but then you redirected it so I deleted the csd from the redirect. And now I'm so confused I don't know if the last step was right or not. AngelOfSadness talk 16:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry - these things happen with edit conflicts ;-)  – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:28, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the mess :D. I guess we were both trying to do what was best with the article/userpage. Articles can have such strange titles and I guess that's why I didn't suspect it was a userpage. AngelOfSadness talk

3-way

Is it possible to design a 3-way station for WP:TRAIL? Simply south 22:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, but it won't be for a few days I'm afraid. – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Cambrian Coast Line
Barmouth Barmouth Bridge Morfa Mawddach Fairbourne

I've had a first bash at creating a three-way station - see commons:Image:BSicon BHFABZld.svg. It looks ok at large size, but could do with improving when scaled down: see example to right. – Tivedshambo (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

That was the quickest few days i've ever seen :). Anyway sorry i've taken long to get back. I think it looks quite good so far. Btw, i also asked this at Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template#Rerequest and so maybe you could also place this there?

It also needs to be probably created for the other 3 directions and also with faded parts, as usual. Simply south 19:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this - each side of a triangle can be open with open line with open platform, open line with closed platform, or closed line (consider Ambergate for example, which has all three). Each triangle can be in one of four orientations, and the whole set can be red/pink or blue/light blue. This gives 3x3x3x4x2=216 combinations. Apart from the length of time it'll take me to produce them all, how should we name them? – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I didn't realise. And also looking at the coding, unfortunately it looks like that would do to be in line. Therfore BHFABZ... Simply south 21:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice trial here. Anyway, i am feeling VERY bad as it would actually be coded ABZBHF... Simply south 17:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

welsh

On your user page in Welsh wikipedia, you maybe want "Ffotograffau Cymreig" instead of "Cymraeg". [4]

Boghandel 17:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Diolch - thanks! – Tivedshambo (talk) 18:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Passenger services on the Foss Islands Branch Line

Hi. Passenger trains on the DVLR definitely terminated at Layerthorpe, so didn't actually run on any part of the Foss Islands Branch Line at any time, as can be seen from your nifty diagram.

Talking of which, the line into the chocolate factory was beyond the Halt, as approached from the York/Scarborough line, rather than before it where you've currently positioned it on the diagram. It also faced the opposite way from that shown, and would have involved a reversing operation for freight coming that way, though not if coming from Foss Islands or the DVLR. And there was an elaborate railway system round the works, too - maybe you could put in a loop there!

Oh, and in my view the FI depot is the end of the FI Branch and should be part of the straight line on the diagram, and the link to Layerthorpe station and the DVLR should be a spur off to the right - the article is about the Branch, isn't it?

Best --GuillaumeTell 21:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I've done the best I can, though I suspect the Rowntree system will be too complex to add, even if I expand the diagram to the maximum 5 columns (see WP:RDT). See the Mitchells and Butler depot on Harborne Branch Line for a similar example. – Tivedshambo (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Google Earth screenshots

Howdy, I just wanted to point out that while Google Earth screenshots are released for use and the copyright itself is not the issue with Wikipedia; the licensing for screenshots includes the stipulation that they not be used for commercial use. Wikipedia does not permit images which come with a non-commercial clause. So basically, Google Earth images are indeed forbidden from use on Wikipedia; but just for a different reason. Cheers! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 10:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Indiana University Kokomo Division of Education

I have made the necessary edits to the entry. Please note that this page is an encyclopedia entry which defines and provides a historical context for the School of Education at Indiana University Kokomo. It is not a marketing page, but instead a fact-based, historical encyclopedic entry.

--Dcantu 20:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but the whole page read like an advert not an encyclopaedia entry, and changing it from first person to third person did not change this. In future, please bear in mind What Wikipedia is not and Conflict of interest. – Tivedshambo (talk) 05:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Product development institute

Hi there,

I have created a neutral page for Stage-Gate Process and Product Development Institute both were tagged by someone at Wiki on "speedy delete". There is no blatant advertising. The article talks about the process of stage and gates which is used in over of 80% of new product development and secondly, in the New Product Development page created on Wiki - the reference from Dr. Robert Cooper is the research conducted is from the Product Development Institute. I was merely linking this Institute to have a page on its own. That's all...trying to add content rich to Wiki.

PLEASE tell me what I NEED to do to get something POSTED on WIKI.

I think i share the frustration of trying to get something posted on Wiki like countless others before me! ````SunilSunil Bechar (talk · contribs)

I've left a welcome message on your talk page - hopefully this will answer your questions. – Tivedshambo (talk) 18:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:London Midland Network ZP.svg

Image:London Midland Network ZP.svg I have altered the image to remove copyright. Let me know if this is enough? Or is more needed?

I was just meant to convert the original to svg, and I asked the requester to fix the copyright, but apparently he didn't. XcepticZP 07:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think changing the colour is sufficient, as it still seems to be a derivative of this image. It will need to be redrawn from scratch, with a different layout as it is not a scale diagram. I'm willing to try and produce one, along the same lines as this image, but it may take me some time. Alternatively, route diagram templates could be used. – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

If you want to draw it, go ahead... It'll be time consuming, though! I, personally, only did it because it was a simple conversion. But, it's clearly more trouble than I expected! XcepticZP 11:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I have "sort of" fixed the copyright. However, I would be very grateful if the Graphics Lab could do more if it is necessary- it may not be. I can see how the image might still be a violation of copyright, but if enough colours were changed, and maybe a slightly different layout, it would be fine. I do appreciate that it is time consuming and I do thank you for your excellent work so far, Dewarw 17:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I hope that was an admin that removed that copyright thing from the image page? I'm glad the copyright is okay for now, a layout change is in the pipeline for this image. That would definately remove any copyright vios. XcepticZP 20:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I've copied this thread to the image's talk page for further discussion - please leave any further comments there. Thanks. – Tivedshambo (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Prod notification

I see you've added Sutton House Hotel as a link in the Erdington article. I've proposed this article (Sutton House Hotel, not Erdington!) for deletion, as I can see no evidence of notability about it whatsoever. – Tivedshambo (talk) 10:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree - does not seem notable to me. Aatomic1 11:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

SR Merchant Navy Class

Hello. I understand that you may be busy at this time, but I'm wondering whether you would like to review the article SR Merchant Navy Class, which is currently an FAC. Any feedback you give would be of great help and gratefully received.--Bulleid Pacific (talk) 15:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

---

Redirects

Re: this edit:

Fair enough - I wasn't aware of that guideline. However, my personal view is that I don't like seeing unnecessary links to redirects - it smacks of carelessness as though the editor hasn't checked the link (though I'm occasionally guily of this myself.) In this situation, I don't see that Napolean will be developed into a separate article, except as possible a future disambiguation page in which case any links will need to be updated anyway. However I'm not going bothered enough to get into a revert war about it ;-)  – Tivedshambo (talk) 12:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Shambo. Yeah when I started out here, I'd always make sure it was linked to the "correct" article until I heard about that guideline. If you really prefer the exact link, go ahead and change it. But it's probably not worth getting into a hastle over. Thanks! Spellcast (talk) 12:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Phil Rosser

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Phil Rosser. I do not think that Phil Rosser fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because There is a calim of notability (subject came 4th in large tournament). I request that you consider not re-tagging Phil Rosser for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page.  – Tivedshambo (talk) 08:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I didn't retag it for speedy, although I did place it up for AfD, at which point it was speedied anyway. You'll want to take that up with User:Caknuck. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 08:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

My mistake - I may have put this warning on the wrong user, though as it's been deleted I can't check the history. I won't contest the speedy, as it's almost certainly a hoax (no references in Google to Phil Rosser and tennis). – Tivedshambo (talk) 08:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Following that comment, I found the history in my cache - you did use the speedy tag {{db|CSD A7}}. – Tivedshambo (talk) 08:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I meant that I hadn't re-tagged it as speedy; when I saw that you'd untagged it, I wasn't about to retag it as a speedy deletion. Instead, I was taking it to AFD. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 08:18, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Reverting

Please provide some evidence that a separate railway line actually exists between Cardiff and Nottingham before reverting again. Consider this a {{uw-test1}}. Also please refrain from throwing around accusations (WP:AGF). 85.92.190.81 19:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

By the nature of your edits, you are quite clearly 90.203.45.244 and the warnings given there still apply. As far as your edits go, I am neutral on Cardiff Central to Nottingham Line, but arbitarily changing an article to a redirect is not the way to go about deleting it. Take it to WP:AFD instead. As for Stourbridge Town Branch Line, you have obviously either failed to read the discussions listed, or chosen to ignore them. Wikipedia works on consensus - if you do not agree with the consensus you will just have to put up with it. Further reversions without discussion will be taken as vandalism and dealt with accordingly. – Tivedshambo (talk) 19:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)