User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 29

Latest comment: 1 year ago by TrangaBellam in topic Notice of noticeboard discussion

Signature image

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm not sure they got the memo - to me this qualifies as disruption by putting it in in the first place, and then readding it after advised to stop and remove per policy. Pretty clear that they're trying to give their comments more precedence by using the WHO flag in their signature - and this is similar to the past ANI thread about their disruption before that led to them "vanishing" to avoid sanctions that would've been virtually certain had they not left. For completeness, also noting their past 3RR violations in the topic area. I'm not sure if you'd feel comfortable blocking as NOTHERE, but I certainly think more should be done - just wanted you to have the full backstory on the user given that you attempted to enforce the signature policy on them. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

No its not trying to give my comments more precedence, its just I found a pretty signature tutorial that had flags on it, and I don't find it nice when people decide to change my talk page comments. I'll try to find it. Previous discussions arent relevant here, anyone can see a block log. -- Almaty 18:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
And not that it is relevant, but that 3RR violation was intentional to get a block during a period of extreme wikistress. And then my topic ban was unanimously removed by the administrators. I find it troubling when people go right through peoples wiki history to find any possible behaviour pattern right back to the start of them editing, and that is why I left the last time. -- Almaty 18:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Wouldn't have been the signature tutorial, and as mentioned the policy clearly prevents images. in signatures. Furthermore, I quite frankly don't believe you merely did it because it was "pretty". You selected the WHO flag because you wanted to try and give the aura of "officiality" or "better science" or something similar to your comments - otherwise there's better images you could've just as easily selected that would've been "prettier". -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I did it because my username is a metaphor for the Alma Ata declaration, seriously that's it. Also to quote why I left in the ANI thread from last year On wikipedia you are able to just ignore all the positive things, and bring up unrelated stuff from the past, presenting it without nuance, without tone of voice, literally forever, to prove anything about an editor you do not like for whatever reason and you are doing so again. -- Almaty 18:45, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Almaty: I find it rich that you don't want me to post to your talk page, yet you seem fine about posting on mine. You need to find that tutorial that describes how to use an image, and fast: if I see you make any post where your signature contains any image whatsoever, and which is timed later than 18:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC) (the time that I saved this post), I shall open a thread about you at WP:AN, in which I shall link this revision of your talk page together with this thread. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Look I did follow a tutorial, I can't find it right this second. The reason I don't like people commenting on my talk page is the exact same reason I gave for leaving. I can't find the tutorial right this second, but I promise you it exists. Lets take the heat out of this discussion and not threaten to do anything, if it is that offensive I'll remove the image. -- Almaty 18:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
And I really, really hope that wikipedians dont think a badly formatted signature give[s] the aura of "officiality" or "better science" or something similar just saying that gave me ample reason to remove it. --Almaty 19:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
For reference, I can't find exactly the tute, but here is a Signpost article about it. If you feel strongly about signatures please update the policy to either for or against flags, to avoid unnecessary wikipedia arguments. --Almaty (talk) 19:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
You blew it by making this post that used an image in the signature. You're now at AN. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Template:WikiProject Music

Hi Redrose64! Thank you for noting the lack of a Template:WikiProject Music for article assessment on Talk:Environment and intelligence. I shall be investigating why Wikipedia:RATER even allowed me to add the project - when it also presented me with "needs-infobox" and "needs-image" options, I reasonably presumed that the template existed. It made me concerned that there is no such music template for such an important project, so I have inquired at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music about what to do. Thanks! Bibeyjj (talk) 09:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bibeyjj: It was their decision some years ago that there should not be a banner template. There has been one in the past, but it has existed only for short periods of time - it has been created and deleted several times, see for instance Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 August 27#Template:WikiProject Music. If you check the archives of , you will find several relevant threads, most recently Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Archive 39#Recreating Template:WikiProject Music. Generally speaking, a more specific template such as {{WikiProject Classical music}}, {{WikiProject Jazz}} or {{WikiProject Rock music}} should be used. These are just examples: there are plenty of others. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Reverted edits

Hi Redrose64, I was wondering why you reverted my recent edits on Template:Grading scheme I chose to update it because the time stamps for the old articles were very outdated. Do you mind explaining your choice? Kokopelli7309 (talk) 19:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Kokopelli7309: I can't find any evidence that you discussed your changes before making the edits. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

RfC at Jessica Yaniv

Hi Redrose64, I'm hoping to pick your brain on how to handle the RfC at Talk:Jessica Yaniv, where you recently tweaked the request to use the old RFC ID. The discussion was closed by a non-admin, and an admin recently vacated the close because it was not done appropriately. Does unclosing mean that the RfC should be relisted, and should the discussion remain open for another 30 days? Thanks, Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers: Using the same rfcid as originally allotted should mean that WP:FRS subscribers don't get double-messaged. Whatever the rfcid value, it's relisted automatically (see for example these edits), because Legobot notices the presence of a {{rfc}} where the next valid timestamp is less than thirty days ago. In this edit, CatCafe (talk · contribs) should have restored the {{rfc|bio|rfcid=7D1CE71}} that was removed in this edit, although the follow-up edit added two timestamps where only the first one was necessary - the second one is misleading, so I have removed it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:29, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, and for removing the misleading timestamp. Should the other June timestamp have been added? Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Absolutely it should remain: without it, Legobot will pull the rfc as being more than thirty days old. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
I really appreciate your help so far, and I just want to state that I am ok with you saying something along the lines of "I don't want to talk to you about this any longer." What you're saying above is getting at the heart of what I'm asking: is it appropriate to call Legobot in to relist an rfc just because an inappropriate close was vacated? Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Extending an RfC is not a crime - it's explicitly covered at WP:RFC#Duration, last paragraph. It says insert a current timestamp immediately before the original timestamp of the opening statement, but if the person extending the RfC is not the originator, the fresh timestamp is better placed before the original signature of the opening statement.
The essential thing to remember is that Legobot, having located a {{rfc}} tag, then reads on from that point to find the next valid timestamp, which is used to determine if the RfC is more than thirty days old or not. If not, all of the text between those points is copied to the relevant RfC listing pages, if it's not there already. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Got it, and thank you. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 19:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


I did not see it actually but thanks for fixing it for me, I appreciate it. --Vacant0 (talk) 22:16, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

It amazes me the number of times that I've seen people add their name to the bottom of an alphabetic list. The list itself should be clue enough; providing a direction as well shouldn't be necessary. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:22, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

South Western Railway


In regards to my edit in South Western Railway I truly have no idea how |} got added as I don’t recall adding that. I thought I had just removed a cite so I thank you for removing what was wrong.

Again sorry for adding } as I never ment to and I may never understand how it got added. Maurice Oly (talk) 18:36, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

You added it in this edit. I suspect a faulty script, since you are not the first to make that mistake. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

James Caan

Can you please revert your changes thanks. [redacted]

Sent from my iPhone — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burtonwj (talkcontribs) 17:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

@Burtonwj: I have no idea what this is about. If you wish to draw my attention to an article (or other page), it's always best to link it. Use diffs if you wish to discuss a particular edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:10, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
My apologies - Burtonwj (talk) 20:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
what verified source needed to be quoted for the marriage between James and Alia Caan in 2020 ?
Public image was uploaded from his website. ? Burtonwj (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2021 (UTC) Burtonwj (talk) 20:06, 26 June 2021 (UTC) Burtonwj (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
@Burtonwj: OK, so the article is James Caan (entrepreneur), but you don't state which edit is causing you concern. In my twelve years on Wikipedia, I have made exactly one edit to that article: it was this one. I am not going to revert it, because the publication is clearly a magazine, for which {{cite magazine}} is preferred to {{cite web}}, even when the text is available online; and an author of |last=Matters|first=Business is plainly ridiculous. You did not add that content (it was added by Jimothyyy (talk · contribs) in February 2019 with this edit) so I fail to see how your subsequent comments above relate to that edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:50, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Victoria de Angelis

I was using the Twinkle tag tool. How do we report that the tool misplaces things? Robert McClenon (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: See WP:TW#Quick info, the bit beginning "Reporting bugs or requesting features". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:25, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Described with diff at WT:Twinkle, and I will see what the developers say now. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

GWR 4600 Class

I thought a TOC on an article that really consists only of the lead section looked a bit over-engineered. If I'd used inline refs, or skipped the 'see also', there wouldn't be a TOC anyway (<4 sections). But I don't mind deferring to a second opinion.--Verbarson (talk) 22:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

That "See also" section had a random look about it, since nothing in the text suggested why the link was relevant (WP:SEEALSO). It's easily fixed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:43, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Neat. Thank you.--Verbarson (talk) 08:45, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Block needed

Special:Contributions/Anabanana67Drill it (talk) 22:37, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@Drill it:   Done --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:49, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

WPWP Edit summaries

FWIW, I complained about the same thing (plus, about the wrong photo being added to an article) last summer; see meta:Talk:Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos#Many problems. (I've left another note over there.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 10:30, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

  Thanks for taking care of the RfC process like you do! JBchrch talk 21:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)


Hi, Redrose64. Thank you for correcting my mistake but I'm a bit confused. The edit notice for that page says ...ClueBot III will automatically archive requests marked with {{Already done}}, {{Close}}, {{Done}} {{Not done}}, and {{Resolved}}. I didn't see {{not done for now}} in the list and thought it would be safe to use it to indicate the request should remain open but "on hold". Does the edit notice need to be updated? Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Eggishorn: The editnotice is misleading. At the top of the page is the archiving code, it is the {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}} template. One parameter in that is:
|archivenow=<!-- <nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}},{{resolved,{{Resolved,{{done,{{Done,{{DONE,{{already done,{{Already done,{{not done,{{Not done,{{close,{{Close,{{nd,{{xXxX</nowiki> -->
It took me several months to work out why some threads were being archived that shouldn't and others were not being archived that should have been - it's because ClueBot III doesn't look for templates, it looks for strings. The |archivenow= parameter is a comma-separated list of strings that are to be taken as archive triggers. It's case-sensitive, which is why both {{not done and {{Not done are in there, and the first of these two will match on {{not done for now}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:40, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I get it. That's why the {{NDFN}} shortcut works, it only searches for {{nd. I can't think of what the {{xXxX string is supposed to match but thank you again for the help. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
The {{xXxX thing is a terminator, because ClueBot III won't process the last item of the (comma-separated) list - whatever comes after the last comma cannot be a valid template, so it's a dummy value instead, chosen as a string that is highly unlikely to be encountered. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Letting folks know about the RfCs for the presidential series boxes & VP series boxes

I'm such a noob on RfCs and don't want to muck anything up so... It's true, I volunteered and am taking on the task of letting allllllthe US Pres & VP articles and allllll the associated wikiprojects know about Survey Question 1 & Survey Question 2. How best can I do that? Lol, I had no idea how complicated it could get, so Help! Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 02:13, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I could write a bullet-point list of things to do and not do when starting an RfC, but there are so many pitfalls that it would become unwieldy: I see many RfCs that should never have been started. It's always a good idea to discuss potentially-controversial actions, but it's not always a good idea to make an RfC out of them. The people at WP:RSN even have an editnotice on the matter.
The best advice is this: ask yourself if a full-blown thirty-day formal RfC is really necessary? Is WP:RFCBEFORE exhausted? Would another method be more appropriate?
Anyway, the Pres & Veep RfCs seem to be listed at WP:RFC/POL properly now, and Yapperbot is sending out notices to user talk pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Yeah...well, the thing is that at least one very experienced editor is muchly against the series boxes (their reasons make some sense) and maybe others are too so I think an RfC of some type was going to be necessary. Yay Yapperbot! I knew there had to be a bot around here somewhere that did some of this...but should I manually post notices on the Pres & Veep articles & at any associated WikiProjects or is there a bot that does that as well? Shearonink (talk) 13:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Bots don't post RfC notices except to user talk pages. By all means put a (neutrally-worded) notice on the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects, templates such as {{fyi|pointer=y}} are available for this. I'm not sure about the article talk pages - from Washington to Harris there are around 90, so it could fail WP:CANVAS. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Isn't it odd that wanting to let people know in a neutral way about this possible change could run afoul of CANVAS... Well...hmmm...In addition to the associated WikiProjects maybe I could post a notice on a few of the most heavily-trafficked articles' talkpages, like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, the two Roosevelts, JFK, Clinton, and maybe one or two others? There's a fine line between too much notice and not enough I guess... I'll think about it, thanks for your time & attention. Shearonink (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Here's one of the RfC notices I put up. I posted at the talk pages for WikiProject:Bio, WikiProject Politics, and WikiProject United States. Any other WikiProjects you think I should post the RfC notice at? (I did consider some others but so many Projects are actually somewhat moribund, those didn't seem worth it.) Shearonink (talk)
There are lots of WikiProjects that somebody, sometime, has decided are moribund/inactive/defunct/DOA. I think that it's better to notify too many moribund WikiProjects than too few active ones, that way nobody can claim "hey - why weren't we told?". The ones that you did notify look like a fair selection (I might have informed WT:WikiProject U.S. Congress too, on the grounds that the VP is also President of the Senate), and the notice does everything that it should do. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:41, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Point taken - I added a notice to the WikiProject Congress talkpage, a few more WikiProjects & a taskforce, plus also placed a notice on a few US Pres article talkpages - Washington, Lincoln, & JFK. I think that seems like enough, hope so anyway. Don't want to go overboard. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 22:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)


Hi, I hope you're well; good to see you still editing. I think I remember you hosting meetups before; I was thinking of hosting a virtual one on Teams or Zoom. How do I go about organising one? Cheers Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 20:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: I organised several in-person meetups in Oxford (and you attended at least one), but never a virtual one. Try asking one of the people who have organised the London virtual meetups - Philafrenzy (talk · contribs), Quizzicalmind159 (talk · contribs) and The wub (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Ok cheers. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 11:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
I haven't had anything to do with the London virtual meetups, The Wub is the person for advice on that, but I did start the Oxford meetup, in 2012, unbelievably. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

North Eastern Railway Fact Sheets

This isn't an advert as the North Eastern Railway Association fact sheets are free of charge and an important source of concentrated information on the NER. They have been compiled to allow anyone to access the information. They are downloadable pdf files, they appear in out "shop" because that seemed the most logical place to make them easily available. Neil Mackay, NERA Chairman ANeilM (talk) 11:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@ANeilM: Ah, so you have a conflict of interest. Nonetheless, when citing a source, we link to the source itself, not a webpage showing where the source may be obtained from. We also don't put references in section headings. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
I see what you mean. How about simply quoting it like a book citation, so the reader then has to go find the work himself? There's then no reference to a webpage. Would that work? Appreciate your advice! BTW I would really like to replace the rather dull NER crest with a colour version, but it's part of a template. Can you point me to a guide on editing templates? I don't expect you to tell me how to edit, I am happy to learn :-) ANeilM (talk) 11:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
This isn't a part of a template, it's an image in its own right. Create your colour image, upload it to Commons with a new name and using a valid license, then alter the |logo_filename= parameter of the {{Infobox rail}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Super, it worked, many thanks!ANeilM (talk) 12:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Southwestern Railway

In regards to Southwestern Railway it is down to a faulty script that the issue keeps happening I am not manually adding in the “|}” I never have done.

I edit on mobile mostly using visual editing mode so I don’t see the wikicode when looking at the changes I have made.

I only use source mode which shows me wikicode when I need to add in a magazine as a cite or when I need to deal with using ref name outside of an infobox.

Due to being on mobile and using mobile view I don’t see the wikicode changes when I look at my changes before I publish my my edits to pages, on mobile the view I get just shows the article as it would look on mobile. Maurice Oly (talk) 22:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Maurice Oly: By clicking Publish changes, you take full responsibility for what is occurring. Using a script does not absolve you of the responsibility to check that your edit is valid. The mobile interface is known to be lacking in certain ways, and Visual Editor is still in beta and known to be buggy - my advice is not to use either of them. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting the List of cross-dressing characters in animated series page

That was definitely the right decision. The one user who I reverted that one time decided to remove entries, thinking there was a consensus, but the discussion is still ongoing. I'm not sure why people do that. Hopefully, this will push them to engage in discussion rather than taking out entries. --Historyday01 (talk) 20:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Windows 7 Home Premium

I noticed in one of your replies at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) that you are using Windows 7 Home Premium. You can still get a legal upgrade to Windows 10 if you want it. See how here. I have several old PCs, and all the ones that are capable are running Windows 10. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, it reminds me every time I power up that it's out of support. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Lost text

Hi Redrose

I have lost some text in my sand box (two paras in the early years section). Any ideas how I can sort it out? I have tried deleting bits of text but that makes the problem different/worse.

Thanks --Davidvaughanwells (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Davidvaughanwells, you had an unclosed reference. I've fixed it for you: [1]. Mackensen (talk) 11:36, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 12:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with the COVID-19 consensus templates!

I do have a question, though, that I think you might be able to answer...

When transcluding Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Consensus (which contains those templates) onto the main page of the project, it creates new top-level TOC entries that should not be there. However, when transcluding the individual templates (1 2), the TOC links SHOULD be there! See: this transclusion example where the TOC link is beneficial.

Is there any way to thread this needle? I'm sorry we keep needing your help to clean up the html! But I figured I'd ask this time instead of trying a bunch of stuff that won't work and makes it inherently worse... Thank you for any help you can provide.--Shibbolethink ( ) 19:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

If there is a heading, it will appear in the TOC. If you don't want it to appear in the TOC, you need to suppress it entirely, perhaps by using a parameter so that might have |showheading=yes on pages where you do want it to appear. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Redrose64, ahhhh that is good advice. okay thank you! Perhaps one with html tags to replicate the heading but no TOC, and the other a conventional <h2>heading</h2>? I'll look into it, thank you for the advice. Shibbolethink ( ) 19:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Timeline of Francis Drake's circumnavigation

Hello and thank you for the marvelous cleanup work you did on the many tiny parts of the article. Kind regards,Hu Nhu (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

  You're welcome! --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Assembly constituencies of Andhra Padesh

 Template:Assembly constituencies of Andhra Padesh has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPGuy2824 (talkcontribs) 09:47, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824: Thanks, but you don't need to inform every contributor, particularly where the edit concerned was very small - see WP:TFDHOW, step III. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't notice the size of your edit. Ignore the discussion, if you want to. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Circle line/Ray Street gridiron

Top to bottom: Ray Street bridge; the Ray Street Gridiron; the Widened Lines

I stand corrected. But if that is so, the following article is also wrong:

Hammersmith & City line "After King's Cross St Pancras the line is in cutting, passing under the Ray Street Gridiron that carries the City Widened Lines used for Thameslink services."

The following article seems to say the opposite, but I find it somewhat unclear:

Widened Lines "The parallel tracks from King's Cross to Farringdon, first used by a GNR freight train on 27 January 1868, entered a second Clerkenwell tunnel before dropping at a gradient of 1 in 100, passing under the Ray Street Gridiron carrying the original Met track before ascending a 1 in 40 slope to Farringdon."

Alarics (talk) 11:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, in
  • Day, John R. (1963). The Story of London's Underground (1st ed.). Westminster: London Transport. pp. 16–17.
we find

The 'Widened Lines', as they have always been called, run north of the Metropolitan tracks from King's Cross to the 'new' Clerkenwell tunnel. Built between November 1865 and May 1867, the tunnel is 733 yd. in length. At its eastern end the mouth is some 16 ft. lower than that of the original tunnel, and the Widened Lines dip under the Metropolitan tracks and run from there to Moorgate on the south side of the other lines. The Metropolitan lines were carried across the Widened Lines by an unusual wrought-iron bridge which also acted as a strut between the walls of the deep cutting. The bridge was well known in railway circles as the 'Ray Street Gridiron'. It was replaced by a concrete raft in 1960

and the same text (with trivial variations of spacing and punctuation for the two measurements) appears in subsequent editions down to at least
  • Day, John R.; Reed, John (2008) [1963]. The Story of London's Underground (10th ed.). Harrow: Capital Transport. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-85414-316-7.
that being the most recent that I have. Or see
  • Padgett, David; Kelman, Leanne (November 2019) [1994]. Munsey, Myles (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 5: Southern & TfL (4th ed.). Frome: Trackmaps. map 44A. ISBN 978-1-9996271-2-6.
Or you could check with DavidCane (talk · contribs). Then there's WP:OR: the place where the two lines cross is easy to spot: take any westbound train from Farringdon, and watch the other line. If you're on a Circle/H&C/Met train (platform 2), you'll see the Thameslink route to your left getting lower and lower until it suddenly swings to the right and passes under your own route, just before you go into the tunnel. If you're on a Thameslink train (platform 4), you'll see the Circle/H&C/Met route to your right getting higher and higher (relatively speaking) until it suddenly passes over your head, and then you're in the tunnel. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
The diagram on page 32 of Joe Brown's London Railway Atlas, (4th edition), shows the Thameslink/City Widened lines go under the grid iron crossing from the north side of the Metropolitan/Circle line tracks to the south, then into Farringdon and on to City Thameslink or (before their closure in 2009) on the south side of the Metropolitan/Circle line through Barbican to Moorgate. The current Underground line tracks at Farringdon were opened when the station was moved to allow the extension to Moorgate. The original Metropolitan Railway platforms were west of the Thameslink platforms, under what is now the site of long, narrow 1980s office building at 20-50 Farringdon Road.
Picture link at Flickr.--DavidCane (talk) 13:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. So the sentence I quoted earlier from Hammersmith & City line is definitely incorrect and needs rewriting. Will one of you two do it? -- Alarics (talk) 20:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  Done --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@Alarics: These two Geograph images both show the Ray Street gridiron: London Underground lines near Farringdon; Heading North. The skew bridge over the gridiron at ground level is Ray Street itself. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:16, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Many thanks. -- Alarics (talk) 08:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Peerage titles and honorifics: MOS amendments

I have made a proposal to amend the MOS at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#Peerage titles and honorifics amendments; you might be interested to contribute to the discussion. DBD 14:02, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Correction made

My apologies, I've retracted the List discussion, per your advise at the related RFC. Didn't know it wasn't allowable. GoodDay (talk) 20:32, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

PS: Been here for over 15 years & still don't know all the rules. Darn too many of them ;) GoodDay (talk) 20:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

PPS: You could've contacted me directly about it, first :) GoodDay (talk) 20:45, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Would it be out of line, if I asked you to 'retract' your WP:MULTI post, at said RFC? Now that I've corrected my mistake? GoodDay (talk) 21:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I really am surprised that you were not aware of that page. Are you also unaware of WP:FORUMSHOP? It's on a different page that you must have come across at some point. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I made a mistake. I'm not perfect, nor have I ever claimed to be. GoodDay (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
OK, but if you start a second thread for a matter that is under discussion elsewhere, and you are aware of that other discussion, it's good practice to provide a link to that earlier thread. Ideally, you would also add a comment to the earlier thread that links to the newer one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:06, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Very well. GoodDay (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I take it, you're not going to 'retract' your post at said-RFC? GoodDay (talk) 13:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)


Do you think 2017 wikitext editor could be doing that? I was completely unaware. Tillywilly17 (talk) 20:51, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't know: but if the editor that you are using is buggy, I would stop using it. Of the other editors available, I've not used WP:VE since about two days after it went live in 2012, because it was buggy then and is still buggy now. If you're a software engineer, you may be surprised to learn that after more than eight years, it's still in beta. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Problematic sortkeys - revert or report?

This is in regard to edits by Bmcln1 (talk · contribs) that I disagree with. Briefly, Bmcln1 has been editing articles about places to alter the sort key of eponymous categories to be the page name itself instead of a single space (example), which goes against WP:CATMAIN; there have been several dozen instances of this in the last few days. After reverting that instance and being myself reverted, I tried discussing on their user talk page, which didn't go smoothly - this edit means that avenue is no longer an option. Because I feel that discussion at Talk:Carmarthen as requested by Bmcln1 is not appropriate (because the matter affects several dozen articles, not just one), should I revert all of the problem edits, or file a case at WP:ANI? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

From what I can tell, "by all means write the category in as you know best" was the other editor attempting to disengage with you, and you next comment, "If you cannot answer satisfactorily, I shall serve you a formal warning" is where things escalated. I hope you don't mind the unsolicited feedback, but I think more collegial tone is probably going to elicit more cooperation in cases like this in the future, even when you have a policy or guideline on your side. I don't see any more edits in their contribution history since your conversation that altered sort keys. My suggestion would be to change the sort keys back again, but leave the template parameter spacing alone, and see if the other editor reverts you. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 21:57, 25 August 2021 (UTC)


Hi Redrose, I have restored my previous version of this article. If you see a mistake that I have made, you are welcome to follow traditional wikipedia practices and fix it. I do not believe that every wikilink I added to this article is incorrect and that reverting all my edits is justified. We need to discuss this. Thank you. Rogermx (talk) 19:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

@Rogermx: You refer to this edit which is the third time that you have added the same incorrect links.
The main mistakes that you are making are of relevance: the election is for district council wards, therefore, if there is to be any link in the first line of each result box, it should be to an article about that specific ward, and not to an article about a place which may be within the ward - or worse, only partially within. For instance, one ward is named Adderbury, Bloxham & Bodicote. If that is to be linked, it should be to a single article about that ward. Making three links is misleading, particularly since there are other settlements within that ward, such as Milton. Another ward is named Bicester East, yet you linked to Bicester as if the whole of that town was in the ward, which it is not.
Fewer in quantity but greater in error are the links that you are making to UK parliament constituencies: Banbury (UK Parliament constituency) covers much more than the Banbury Calthorpe & Easington ward (and please note that there is no comma: there are two place names, not three) whereas a link to Easington (UK Parliament constituency) is, quite simply, just plain wrong - that constituency is hundreds of miles away, and of zero relevance. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:12, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
That is your opinion that the ward name can only be linked to an article about the election district. No one has ownership on this article or the other UK election articles.
  • Is there an article for the Adderbury, Bloxham & Bodicot district? No. However, if people click on the links for these individual settlements, they will be getting information that they would not have received before. If you are concerned about confusion, put a statement in the article
  • Is there an article for Bicester East district? No. However, if the reader clicks on a link to Bicester, they can learn about the entire town, east and west.
  • Did I make a mistake on Easington? Obviously I did and I apologize. You are free to correct it.
Over fifty of these articles were originally marked by another editor, Brownhaired girl, as being underlinked. She suggested to me that I link the town/hamlet/settlement names. You have not given me any good reasons why I shouldn't continue. I will be more careful in my selections. If you disagree with my edits or see mistakes, feel free to change them. Or you could put in the Wikilinks yourself. However, I will revert other articles that have been undone. Thank you for listening. Rogermx (talk) 20:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
You have named BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) (please note capitalisation and spacing) but haven't provided a link to where those suggestions were made. Regarding Did I make a mistake on Easington? Obviously I did and I apologize. You are free to correct it. - I did correct it, and you reverted my correction. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:56, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Redrose64: the discussion is at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Underlinked_tag (permalink).
Rogermx contacted me after an AWB run by me tagged a bunch of articles as {{underlinked}}. This was not a conscious action by me; it was part of AWB's WP:GENFIXES. Obviously, I take responsibility for those edits, but the significance of these being genfixes is that they are generally-accepted fixes.
In that discussion, I suggested linking to the article on the place for which the ward is named.
It seems to me that there are two issues in the linked edit by Rogermx:
  1. Rogermx has linked the names of council wards to articles on parliamentary constituencies. That is obviously always wrong because a parliamentary constituency is composed of multiple wards (usually about 10 to 15 wards).
    I find this worrying, because it indicates that Rogermx lacks some basic understandings of the topic on which they are doing so many edits. The error should have been spotted even without prior knowledge, because e.g. in the case of Banbury, which Rogermx linked to Banbury (UK Parliament constituency), the constituency article lists the wards which comprise the constituency: 2010–present: The District of Cherwell wards of Adderbury, Ambrosden and Chesterton, Banbury Calthorpe, Banbury Easington, Banbury Grimsbury and Castle, Banbury Hardwick, Banbury Neithrop, Banbury Ruscote, Bicester East, Bicester North, Bicester South, Bicester Town, Bicester West, Bloxham and Bodicote, Caversfield, Cropredy, Deddington, Fringford, Hook Norton, Launton, Sibford, The Astons and Heyfords, and Wroxton.
    The link to Easington (UK Parliament constituency) is even worse, because a cursory check would have shown that it doesn't relate to Oxfordshire. Rogermx's re-adding of those links even after being reverted is troubling, esp since Redrose64's revert of 5 June[2] includes an edit summary with an explanation of the problem.
  2. On council wards, I disagree with Redrose64. In most cases, we do not have an article on the ward itself, but we nearly always do have an article on the town(s) or village(s) for which the ward is named. A link to that article is more useful than no link at all. For example Kidlington is indeed split into two wards, and the article on the village doesn't mention this ... but it does describe the place which includes the ward. Until we have articles on the wards, a link to the village is better than no link. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:06, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
I understand the errors I made regarding the council wards and the parliamentary constituencies. I will not attempt to wikilink any of these election articles in the future. I would hope that someone else would take the time to fix the underlinking issues in them. I should also mention that the tables in these articles are violating Wikipedia policy by showing multiple links of "Conservative", "Liberal" etc. Thank you all for your time on this topic. Rogermx (talk) 01:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

RfC on which flag to use for Austria-Hungary's infobox

You are being invited to discuss the question of which flag to use for Austria-Hungary's infobox because you previously participated a discussion on this topic back in 2019. The discussion can be found at Talk:Austria-Hungary#RfC: National flags vs Civil Ensign White Shadows Let’s Talk 18:55, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@White Shadows: You mean this and this? That was hardly participation. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
I simply wanted to make sure you were aware of it becuase I saw your name appear in a previous discussion on the topic when combing through the talk page archives. White Shadows Let’s Talk 19:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Well wagon

It appears that my links for well wagon aren't correct (I'm happy to go through each of them again). The other link at that disambiguation page Open wagon#Pre_containerization well wagons points to a section that isn't very fleshed out. Would that link be acceptable for the pages that you reverted me on? -Niceguyedc (talk) 20:25, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

From June 2013 until yesterday, well wagon redirected to Class U special wagon. I agree that is not the correct link for the places where you reverted me. Well car looks a little better, but still may not be the best. -Niceguyedc (talk) 20:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Niceguyedc: Not necessarily. The thing is, you are changing the links for British topics concerning wagons from many years ago (built before 1939 in most cases), but the Class U special wagon is very much a modern concept. This is a valid edit, but many of your changes concern wagons better described as "implement wagons", "well trolleys", or another type. See for instance
  • Atkins, A.G.; Beard, W.; Tourret, Rick (1998) [1975]. GWR Goods Wagons: A Historical Survey. Abingdon: Tourret Publishing. ISBN 0-905878-07-8.
in particular Chapter7 "C - Boiler Trucks, later called Trolleys (Crocodiles)"; Chapter 10: "F - Steam Roller Trucks"; Chapter 11: "G - Flat and Well Wagons for carrying road vehicles, Covered Motor Car Trucks and Covered Trucks for Motor Car Bodies". Or see
  • Bixley, G.; Blackburn, A.; Chorley, R.; King, Mike (July 2002). An Illustrated History of Southern Wagons, volume four. Hersham: Oxford Publishing Co. ISBN 0-86093-564-7. 0207/A1.
Chapter 11: "Machinery & Well Trucks", pages 105 to 113 inclusive; or
Chapter One "Special Wagons", pages 36 to 88 inclusive; or
Chapter 11 "Special wagons...", pages 119 to 134 inclusive. In these books (and others), you will see that there are many, many different types of wagon depicted, all having one thing in common - the word "well". In general terms, a well wagon is a railway wagon that is constructed in such a manner that part of the load may be carried below the level of the bufferbeams. This wagon is a Well Trolley; this is a Glass Wagon; this is a Low Machine Wagon. They all have a well of some kind or another. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

North London Line / GOBLIN

Dear Redrose54 I put the question on each of the British rail region pages to see if any know any info. I Like The british Rail Class 483 (talk) 22:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@I Like The british Rail Class 483: You should have placed your question on just one of those talk pages. As shown at WP:MULTI, start the discussion in one location and, if appropriate, advertise it elsewhere via a link. Templates such as {{FYI}} and {{please see}} may be used for this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

thank you Redrose64 for the info. I Like The british Rail Class 483 (talk) 23:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

State government categories

Are you able to answer this question? I'm just trying to get a response from somebody. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 03:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)


The Barnstar of Diligent Patience Award
The Barnstar of Diligence may be awarded in recognition of a combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service.
The Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience may be awarded to an editor who has shown extraordinary patience in the face of toil or turmoil.
You deserve both : ) - jc37 10:49, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

So, for tranparency, here's your note to me : )

You have been repeating these things to closers over and over and over at WP:CR, with quite the patience. You truly deserve this : ) - jc37 10:49, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

RfC consensus?

Hi, do you believe there is consensus in this RfC? It has been going on for 2 months, and has pretty much stalled. Nehme1499 08:03, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: Have you considered filing a closure request at WP:ANRFC? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll do that. Nehme1499 10:17, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Unprotection request

I saw that you configured PCR Sacha Parkinson in 2014 for BLP violations, and upon checking the page history, I could not find many reverts that would warrant that today. Would you consider unprotecting? Thanks in advance, (please ping on reply) Sennecaster (Chat) 14:25, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Not recently, no. But there was certainly a lot of revertable activity in 2020, most recently in December. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Middleton Press

Thanks for your observation about fig nos rather than page numbers. Been using page numbers ever since my first entries onto Wikipedia so as you can imagine there are a fair few to correct. --Davidvaughanwells (talk) 09:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

If you count the physical pages in most MP books there are either 80 or 96, but I've not yet seen one where the pages are actually numbered. Normally, the figure (picture) numbers go up to about 120, in some books the maps get a separate series using capital Roman numbers such as map VIII, etc. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to resurrect this one but I am using harvard referencing for an article on Beccles station in my sandbox and it does not seem to like the solution you advised for figures rather than page numbers namely at=fig. 41. Any ideas?--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) The documentation is long, but it is helpful. You're probably looking for |loc=. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
@Davidvaughanwells: What Jonesey95 said. As an example, see Hinksey Halt railway station - which was the first time that I used {{sfn}} in a new article, exactly twelve years ago yesterday. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:50, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Much obliged gents.Davidvaughanwells (talk) 23:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Davidvaughanwells, you're welcome. While we are in learning mode, every day is a good day to learn that we are not all "gents" here on Wikipedia. (Most of us are, so you'll get it right most of the time, but here we are in 2021.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:44, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Jonesy - a potential faux pas there I think.--Davidvaughanwells (talk) 06:59, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Railway stations in East Sikkim district


A tag has been placed on Category:Railway stations in East Sikkim district indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit summary

Thank you. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 22:54, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Template : SYR Doncaster Keadby line c.1850s

When you recently reverted an item on this route map, Template : SYR Doncaster Keadby line c.1850s, did you notice the line of the River Trent (shown in dark blue) is jagged and unsymmetrical? What can be done about that?

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 21:03, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Xenophon Philosopher: I did notice: and my edit was nothing to do with that problem, which has been there ever since this edit of yours at 06:45, 2 September 2021. I have urged you in the past to make use of the WP:PREVIEW feature. My edit was prompted by the template's appearance at Wikipedia:Database reports/Invalid Navbar links, also caused by your 06:45, 2 September 2021 edit; and a day after I fixed it, you broke it again. If you don't understand what the parameters of {{BS-map}} do, particularly |navbar=, don't mess with them. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:28, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Your admonishment is accepted with good grace, but do you agree that the blue line showing the River Trent on the route map looks strange and needs someone with the requisite computer skills (which I certainly have not) to effect this matter.

Since I wrote the above, a contributor has corrected matters, but thank you for your advice all the same. At the age of 76, I appear to be a prime example of the old adage..."There's no fool like an old fool".

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 05:53, 5 October 2021 (UTC)


Hi, something in this edit makes everything below it display small text. DuncanHill (talk) 18:36, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It was a missing </span> tag omitted by a different editor. I have fixed it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
@DuncanHill and Jonesey95: No, it was an extra <span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;"> tag caused in this edit, where Apollo468 (talk · contribs) didn't remove enough of the "unsigned" sig. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 19:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Tele phone numbers

Look I am sorry about those telephone numbers. There is really nothing I can do about that. I frequently edit on my IPhone and IPad, and for some reason they add telephone numbers. This has happened for both visual editor and non-visual Edit.

I also Edit on MacBook. I currently haven’t seen it do that.CycoMa (talk) 15:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

@CycoMa: You have done this several times - examples include Lucifer and Social justice. There must be some sort of app, browser extension or other gadget installed on your device which is causing this, and ideally, you need to disable or uninstall it before editing Wikipedia. If that is not possible, you can prevent (or at least limit) the damage by editing one section at a time (instead of the whole page) and by making use of the "Show changes" feature before you save, to make sure that you are not inadvertently altering other content. Remember that by clicking Publish changes, you are taking responsibility for all alterations that you make to the page, not just those you intended. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:40, 9 October 2021 (UTC)


Thanks for correcting the nonsense. Lots of TOC articles have this silly column heading and a pointer to a long-archived discussion in which nobody was able to conclusively defend its use. Scope for collaboration. I'll likely change a few - feel free to do the same. 10mmsocket (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Need a photo cropped

I remember being told I could do it myself, but I need the directions. Commons is not NewsBank or which have easy procedures for doing it.

More than likely the photo in the Salisbury, North Carolina article needs to stay as is. It would be nice to have a better photo of the Bell Tower for the Bell Tower Green section.

But what I want is the buildings in the lower right corner. I'm uncertain of the notability of User:Vchimpanzee/Farmers & Merchants Bank (Salisbury, North Carolina) but if those buildings have won awards and I can find the evidence, that would help.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

My PC is flaky at the moment, and I don't have much time. Have you tried filing a request at either c:COM:GL/I or c:COM:GL/P? These are the Commons equivalents of our pages WP:GL/I and WP:GL/P. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I thought someone had told me how I could do it myself. I forgot where that was.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
I have gotten no response. I could do it if the photo was on NewsBank or but I'm thinking you told me how I could do it myself.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Redrose64 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Ten years! Yay!   Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!


How could I forget you too... thank you for all you do

Whispyhistory (talk) 05:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:23, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Acceptable approach for Requests for Comments

Redrose64 I saw that you removed my Rfc templates across 2 different pages. Among the reasons for your removal was that I either provided a "meaningless statement" or one that "did not describe the issue by any stretch". In both instances, I specified the issue I wanted a request for comment on so I'm a bit confused by your reasoning. Could you be a bit more specific? I'd like to find a way of getting a discussion going on these pages without getting involved in an edit war. Emiya1980 (talk) 05:37, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Emiya1980: At Talk:Joseph Stalin/Archive 22 you attempted to hold an RfC on an archive page - this is not permitted, because archives are not discussion pages: they are records of past discussions. At Talk:Vladimir Putin, you went straight to RfC without observing WP:RFCBEFORE - I am not saying that you cannot discuss the matter, just that RfC is taking it too far too soon. At Talk:Indira Gandhi, the RfC statement was as follows:
[[File:Indira Gandhi in 1966 (cropped).jpg|thumb|Alternative proposal]]
:{{ping|Toddy1}} {{ping|DaxServer}} {{ping|Peter Ormond}}
which not only lacks a timestamp (mandatory for an RfC statement, see WP:RFCST) it also tells us precisely nothing about the matter that is to be discussed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:27, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
@Emiya1980: I find that I am still having to clear up the mess that you made a month ago. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:12, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Guess you're not in the mood for dumb humor

Did you really consider this a "discussion"? — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 22:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Forgetting to Sign an RFC

So do you mean that if I forget to sign an RFC immediately below the summary question, then I can go back and insert the signature and it will work all right? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:15, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Yes. Legobot reviews all open RfCs every hour, and updates the listings if the statement has been modified. For example, this edit had this effect. It's mentioned in the last paragraph of WP:RFC#Statement should be neutral and brief. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Okay. Thank you for the information. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:23, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

London 176 meetup

Hello, I am very new to Wikipedia editing and saw on Wikimedia there is an event in London for which you have put your name down. Is it a formal event, and will it be easy to know who and where to go? Apologies if I have asked this in the wrong place.DannyHatcher (talk) 14:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

I see that you also asked this at User talk:Philafrenzy#London 176 meetup and User talk:Mccapra#London 176 meetup. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:04, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Yes thought I would ask around. I don't know how to tell how active users are so thought the more I ask, the more likely I would get a response before the event. Still learning all the nuances DannyHatcher (talk) 10:40, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Logging out

Thank you for making a good point at WP:VPT#Blue underlining in edit box. I didn't want to hijack that discussion by replying, but the fact that "Log out" ends all sessions is a useful and easily overlooked security feature. I've added a short paragraph to Wikipedia:User account security#What to do when your account has been compromised. Please can you check that it makes sense and copy/move it to anywhere else that it belongs? Thanks, Certes (talk) 00:25, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Removal of content

Hello. Thanks for answer I will remember where to go next time. I would like to add that between hiding and removing content simplifying. Eurohunter (talk) 20:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


Hi, just checking up on your progress (if any) with the Brother laser. I really hope you manage to get something sorted. I remember low-level hacking the Phoenix BIOS routines on my Amstrad PC 8086 with DOS 3.3 to code a TSR with A86 Assembler (shareware from a PC Magazine front cover floppy) which would switch the active printer between LPT1: and LPT2: with a single keypress; and something a bit like codepages which you had to load in config.sys in order to set up a particular type of dot matrix printer - yep, Device=Printer.sys. Argh, even wiring up my own parallel printer cables... I think it was just as complex back then as now in its own way, pretty much the same sort of insanity. Best wishes, MinorProphet (talk) 15:26, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

OS hacks back then were not difficult, you could access all memory without triggering a General Protection Fault. One of my PCs still uses a routine that I wrote that mirrors the CapsLock state to the top right of the screen, and displays a help bar for the F-keys that changes as you press or release the Shift, Ctrl and Alt keys. Dave Williams' DOSREF (ISBN 1-878830-00-7) was really useful. I also wired several cables myself, including an attachment that converted a 25-way serial cable into a parallel LapLink cable. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:19, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Ha, Laplink (remember it well), eat your heart out! I once acquired an ancient CP/M based computer (Z80?) with an 8" floppy drive and wanted to get the files off it. I wrote a little .com program in assembler which monitored a register in the RS232 port in my PC - 8250 UART I think - (probably not through a DOS interrupt). Using the CP/M pip command to write a file to the RS232 port, my program would grab the data stream and write it to the screen and to a local file. Incredibly satisfying. I think you had to press Ctrl+Z to terminate it, couldn't get it to recognise EOF, or something. Peter Norton's Pink Shirt Book was my guide. Hmm, that massive 1 MB of RAM, dip switches on network cards etc. Also, QEMM-386, windows before Windows. I got my first IT teaching job through studying the manual for the memory model of the IBM PS/2 for several weeks, boldly stood up one day in the tech support office with a whiteboard marker and said, "Well, lads, this is how it works..." MinorProphet (talk) 08:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

 Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Policy or guideline?

Re: this edit, it is customary to cite in the edit summary a policy or guideline for your claim. I will thank you to point me in that direction. P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 11:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

WP:UP#Categories, templates that add categories, and redirects. Basically, some prople will still wish to send you a message; and such messages shouldn't be put on your user page, because it's not a discussion page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:41, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for that; good to know! P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 10:15, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Midland & South Western Junction Railway

If you know how to amend the 'template', to correct the errors I identified, just get on with it. I haven't got time or patience to get into the arcane processes your professional Wikipedians get up to.

Psulagain (talk) 09:45, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Psulagain: In this edit, you added comments to the template. We do not do that: apart from the disruption that it causes, it is not the place that people expect to go to for discussion. That is why we have discussion pages. You should have posted at Template talk:Midland and South Western Junction Railway. Using talk pages for discussion may seem like an "arcane process" to you; but it's a convention that was agreed upon several years before I joined Wikipedia. I accepted it when I first discovered it, and have never once questioned the process. I abide by it, and I expect others to do so as well. There are no "professional Wikipedians", we are all volunteers. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:46, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) True: but after an indeterminate amount of time spent on WP, we find ourselves adopting a professional attitude which far surpasses that of those who do a job 'just for the money'. MinorProphet (talk) 15:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

How did you do this?

Hey Redrose64. You managed to diagnose an SVG that was actually a wrapper around some bit-mapped content. Did you use a graphics editor to figure this out, or some other method? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Whenever I am shown a problem with an SVG file, the second thing that I do (after viewing the image) is to look at the SVG code for the image. No graphics editor is necessary, because SVG is just ordinary plain text (UTF-8 encoded when necessary), resembling HTML although it is much more closely related to XML. Like HTML and XML, it has a number of elements comprising tags, optional attributes, and optional content. For example, line 3 of the source that I gave at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#SVG Political World Map is an 'image' element with one tag, four attributes and no content.
At c:File:World Map (political).svg, click on either the big image or the Original file link, then use your browser's "Page source" tool, which is often Ctrl+U - this shows the underlying SVG, perhaps in a new browser tab. Recent versions of Firefox are deceptive (buggy?) in that the xlink:href= attribute of the <image /> tag displays as the empty string, i.e. xlink:href="" instead of the true value, which is hidden. However, by selecting the whole attribute, including both double quotes, you can copy to clipboard and paste into a plain text editor, revealing the data:image/jpeg;base64, and the binary data that follows. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I should learn something about SVGs. By the way, did you notice that the CIA no longer seems to publish high-quality SVG maps? It seems that they stopped in 2015. For example, this current page shows only PDFs and JPEG, no SVGs at all. EdJohnston (talk) 01:45, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:StateestdecadeBC

 Template:StateestdecadeBC has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:00, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert - gender and sexuality

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Just letting you know about the stricter rules for gender and sexuality related topics on Wikipedia. Don't worry, it's just a standard notice that has to be given and you've not done anything wrong. Sideswipe9th (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:33, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sideswipe9th: Why are you warning me (an administrator who is fully aware of that DS, and has been for several years), when most of my edits in this area have been reverts of edits that violate the rules that you mention? See for example the history of Rebecca Root. Or perhaps Template:Editnotices/Page/Fallon Fox - which I created eight years ago. Where have I been disruptive in any such cases? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Apologies. I didn't see that you were an administrator at the time I made the notice, and the warning that comes up prior to publishing the message that prompts you to search the user's talk page and system logs only stated that you had never received the notice, not that you were in any way exempt from it. I'm just trying to be helpful and there's no accusations of disruptive at all in my message as far as I was aware? Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:56, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Due to past disruption in this topic area. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
That's part of the template, and not something I can or am allowed to change as far as I'm aware. Aside from the subst:alert, the only text I typed was the text outside the bluebox. Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Per my last reply, WP:ACDS#aware.alert states Any editor may advise any other editor that discretionary sanctions are in force for an area of conflict and that an alert is purely informational and neither implies nor expresses a finding of fault. And again, while my alert to an admin was an honest mistake, there's no rules there that say I should not do that where they have not received an alert in the last twelve months and have not placed a DS/aware template at the top of their own talk page. So I again apologise for my good faith mistake in notifying you, and I'd like to reassure you again that there was no accusations of malice or intent. I was just following the standard procedures for this sort of notification. Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi again, I was looking over my contribs and thought of your printer escapades. Any advance in that direction? As regards the above, is there some sort of 'Vital Statistics' page where anyone can see an overview of any WP editor's activity? eg date of first edit, total number of edits, articles/templates/etc. created, most edits of a single article/combined help desk/ref desk/Village pump etc., number of barnstars awarded (probably computable), Precious™ accolades, and so on? I very rarely bother to check out anyone's credentials, I try tend to treat everyone as just a name at the end of a post. For others (as above) it might be a useful resource. Thoughts, if any? PS I don't do barnstars, but here's some pix of a barn not far from where I used to live. MinorProphet (talk) 15:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@MinorProphet: Try the XTools edit counter. Amend the last part of the URL for the user that you're interested in. It's got lots of stats, graphs etc. Barnstars can't be counted automatically. My printer is still not working; the PC knows there's a device connected, but refuses to recognise it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Xtools - Wow, what an amazing example of meaningful data collection! I normally don't use exclamation marks, but I am pretty stunned. I've already added it to my list of useful links. Thank you. I am sadly reminded of all the rather stupid things I have done (probably drunk, oops) and were rightfully deleted/reverted. Trivial comment: I don't know if you can explain, but my main page says "Pages created: 238 (30 since deleted)". This seems to be a huge exaggeration (although I am flattered), and this page confirms only 5 pages deleted. Any ideas? although I can imagine why the discrepancy. I really hope you get your faithful laser working with Win 10, from my experience even the bottom-end models far outweigh/outlast many inkjets. MinorProphet (talk) 17:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
The 5 deleted pages are all in article space, but judging by Special:DeletedContributions/MinorProphet you have created a number of pages in other namespaces which have subsequently been deleted, particularly in User: space - such as User talk:MinorProphet/Sandbox, User talk:MinorProphet/Test Sandbox (both created September 2009, deleted October 2017); User:MinorProphet/List of compositions by Mikhail Ippolitov-Ivanov, User:MinorProphet/List of compositions by Frederic Austin (created May/June 2010, deleted September 2011). I won't list them all, but it does look like there might be 30. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
The sub-page drafts which you discovered, I actually deleted myself after re-creating them in mainspace before I realised you could simply Move them. That explains everything. Thanks for going to the trouble. :>MinorProphet (talk) 12:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Request for Comment vs Peer Review process

Hello, thank you for your message on Talk:Curiosity Stream. I was going to go through the process for requesting peer review, but this was listed on the instructions page:
"Please note:

  • Nominations are limited to one open request per editor.
  • Articles must be free of major cleanup banners
  • Content or neutrality disputes should be listed at requests for comment, and not at peer review."

The Requests for Comments page also states "Requests for comment (RfC) is a process for requesting outside input concerning disputes, policies, guidelines or article content." So it appears from this that the Requests for Comments was the correct avenue since the article I placed it on is for reviewing the content and neutrality in response to the cleanup banner. I was hoping to get input from more experienced users about the issue, is there another process you'd recommend? Otherwise, I'll probably open up the Request for Comments again. Thank you for your help! WyldEys (talk) 12:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@WyldEys: You've not been with Wikipedia for very long. Please don't use RfC as a method of first resort: make sure that you have exhausted the avenues described at WP:RFCBEFORE prior to committing to a full-blown thirty-day formal RfC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
No problem. I didn't realize it was a 30 day formal process. I had posted a question at Teahouse about how to encourage participation on talk pages and the RFC was recommended to me there. I will try other avenues first, thank you for the information. WyldEys (talk) 16:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

"New" editor

Hi Redrose, I hope you're keeping well these days.

When a new editor appears, and shows familiarity with WP policies in his very first edit, mentioning "MOS:DATEUNIFY MOS:DATERANGE" in his edit summary, is it a matter for concern? He hasn't done anything wrong that I'm aware of, but his user page doesn't mention other accounts. Maproom (talk) 20:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

It certainly concerns me. One such editor directly caused the loss of RexxS. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
You've darkly hinted for some time now that said editor is not what he claims to be. Are you planning on actually doing something about that, or just keep making insinuations and accusing them of various crimes? Mackensen (talk) 00:01, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) As a bog-standard editor of non-controversial subjects with no special rights at all, I ask: what is to be done? On the face of it, this level of familiarity with WP terminology on a first edit seems highly suspicious. Most noobs barely know what a <ref> is. Puppetry is a serious charge to bring. I imagine anyone with this level of capability would also have some idea of how to circumvent the standard checks. I have no idea whether standard admins can investigate IP addresses of editors, etc. Can anyone here enlighten me? Only asking out of curiosity. MinorProphet (talk) 19:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
@MinorProphet: The IP address of a logged-in editor is visible only to those with the WP:CHECKUSER right, which is not part of the admin bundle, and there aren't many who have it - just 54 as I write this (list). They can't use this ability lightly or on a hunch, since every use is logged and they must be able to justify every such use. They are able to see which IPs a given username has used, and also which usernames have logged in from the same IP address. I believe that this information is not permanent, but is kept for a limited time only (more than a month but less than a year?), which is why you sometimes find a SPI report being marked {{IPstale}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the links. Having had another look at WP:Signs of sockpuppetry, I found WP:Newbies aren't always clueless helpful, and the suggestion that a new user may have had prior experience as an IP editor. Sad to see Rich Farmbrough in Wikipedia:Database reports/Blocked users in user groups. MinorProphet (talk) 14:06, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Have you ever looked at Rich's block log? It's not the shortest. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I'll probably leave that for another day, having had a swift glance through his talk page. It's a pity to see this happen to someone with a gazillion edits to his credit. I find these sort of exchanges particularly unedifying. One particular remark sticks in my memory, to the effect of "Why don't you just go and create some actual content for a change?" This is all I've ever tried to do, with varying degrees of success. "Oh, I can fling this article together in about six paragraphs, no worries." Ten lengthy sections, 40 notes, 120 refs, and 30 RS cites later, I begin to wonder if it was such a good idea. Fixing PCs is a complete contrast - from one to eight hour's labour to success, fixed, get paid, next please. MinorProphet (talk) 16:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Not quite a gazillion. Rich topped the leaderboard for a long time (until 18 April 2012), and would have been the first to pass the 1 million mark were it not for various issues that occurred around that time. But note the self-block in January 2012 - not many admins do that. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:15, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Self-awareness and self-restraint are admirable qualities; but are apparently lacking in a number of people in above blocklist who were granted various extended rights and are now disallowed. It's often very hard to keep your emotions in check - WP, as a social experiment, has a number of lessons to teach. MinorProphet (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Help:Wikitext Headings revert

Re: you revert of my recent edits to the Help:Wikitext article concerning spaces or not in heading formats...

Consistency within an article and between similar articles is a main goal of Wikipedia, as stated in WP:MOS and several other Wikipedia guidelines. That's why I included that in my edit that you reverted. It doesn't really matter than MOS:HEADINGS does not specifically state that. Truthanado (talk) 12:48, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Consistency is primarily about what the reader sees. To the reader, a spaced heading and an unspaced heading are absolutely identical. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Template edit request

Hi, I recently discovered that in the page Template:Rail-interchange/doc/IN, the {{rint|bengaluru|m}} input doesn't give the desired output, i.e., link to Bengaluru Metro (officially Namma Metro). I went to edit {{rint}} accordingly, but it is 'template protected' and I can't edit it. So, can you please edit it accordingly as you did recently. Thanks! ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 13:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I just realised that non-free image for Namma Metro doesn't exist on Wikipedia, neither can I find one on the web. So, I'd like to request you to not make the edit. I'll edit the India page myself as required. I'm very sorry for the disturbance it caused. Thanks and have a nice day! ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 14:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
@CX Zoom: For future ref, what you should do is amend Template:Rail-interchange/sandbox, set up appropriate tests at Template:Rail-interchange/testcases (in accordance with WP:TESTCASES), and oce these prove satisfactory, post a protected edit request at Template talk:Rail-interchange. Instructions should be shown if you go to Template:Rail-interchange and click the "View source" tab. These instructions conclude with a button Submit an edit request. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Sure,   Thank you very much! ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 09:55, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

  I'm just dropping this off to say thank you for another year of helping me (and others on my talk page) when questions come up about how things work around here. Your knowledge is most appreciated. Cheers and best wishes for your 2022 MarnetteD|Talk 21:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:11, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Re my edit on John Radcliffe Hospital


Just to reply to your comment "are you seriously suggeting that the website of a very British organisation is written in American English?" No, the mentioned parameter came from the automatic citation generator. So it is either an error or it came from the site of the very British organisation itself.

Best, Adam --Adam Harangozó (NIHR WiR) (talk) 07:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

  Merry Christmas, Redrose64!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 00:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!

  Season's Greetings
Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Kings (Bramantino) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 14:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)


Hi Redrose64, I have no idea what happened here. Ofc this was not a valid edit request at all, and I was sure I pressed on "remove request" but idk. Something else must've happened and I was apparently too lazy to double-check the result. Anyway, thanks for removing that crap!! And happy holidays to you!! :) – NJD-DE (talk) 17:36, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

File:Christmas tree in field.jpg Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022!!

Hello Redrose 64, warm wishes to you and your family throughout the holiday season. Whispyhistory (talk) 07:00, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:22, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

A Very British Scandal

Hi Redrose, sorry, but I had to revert your revert. The version as it stands is factually correct. The redirect pointed to a different programme altogether. As I said in the edit summary, it was some interim text. I was going to expand it later, but will do so tomorrow - unless someone else does it. Cheers, Pikemaster (talk) 23:03, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

You wrote Restored the version that is at least correct. the redirect is plain wrong - how is it wrong? This is series 2 of A Very English Scandal (TV series), in which there is sourced information. What you have done is create an unsourced sub-stub. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:13, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
But it is called "A Very British Scandal" - the second series has been retitled as such. It would seem to make sense to have this as a separate article, given that it shows up online with the "British" usage. Pikemaster (talk) 23:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
See here [3]. The title now stands on its own rather than being a so-called second series of A Very English Scandal, which is somewhat misleading usage. Anyway, I really don't care. I've got better things to do than to fight over erroneous trivia such as this. Regards, Pikemaster (talk) 23:21, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm not doubting that the current series is titled "A Very British Scandal", see for instance BBC website. My point is that the existing article A Very English Scandal (TV series) already had sourced information about the new series which was somewhat more comprehensive than what you did here. Since the story concerns a Scottish family and their estate in Scotland the word "English" would have been incorrect, so was altered to "British". You could try reading the current Radio Times, pages 24-27, for some background. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Formula One talk: Drivers from the UK

Hi Redrose64,

I'm not sure if you have any interest in Formula One - or indeed any motorsports whatsoever - but there is an ongoing discussion on the WikiProject Formula One talk page that I'm thinking you might be interested in contributing to:

It's basically to do with whether or not British drivers should always be described as British in F1 race article leads (and not English, Scottish or Welsh), and if drivers from Northern Ireland should be described as British at all.

Thanks and kind regards, 2A02:8084:F1BE:9180:D4FB:3A6D:6109:4AF3 (talk) 12:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

What’s this? Are you canvassing now?Tvx1 21:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Certainly looks like it. I've edited a few F1-related articles in the past, I don't think more recently than this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

A somewhat premature New Year's greeting

John Vanderlyn, Ariadne Asleep on the Island of Naxos (c.1812),
Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts
Best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous 2022.
Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place.
BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 20:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Moral lesson: John Vanderlyn was an American painter who studied in Paris, and his life-sized
Ariadne Asleep on the Island of Naxos was one of the first large nudes exhibited in the United States.
Peddling the poison as well as the cure, this overtly sensuous work was presented to the public as a
moral lesson on the consequences of lascivious behavior. Visible in the distance is the ship of
Princess Ariadne's secret lover, Theseus, for whom she has betrayed her people by helping him to
escape the Labyrinth and slay the Minotaur. Ariadne's bliss will come to an end when she awakens
from her post-coital reverie, only to discover that the faithless Theseus has sailed away without her.
  Thank you, but where's her ball of string? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:49, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps Theseus took that, too. [He wrote, meaning nothing at all off-color.] == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 02:35, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A token of thanks

Hi Redrose64! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Redrose64!

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:26, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Redrose64!

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

  Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:09, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

No worries. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 20:32, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users


You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Edit to GWR railcars

Hello. I noticed you changed one of my references giving the reason "rm misused parameter". Im new to editing wikipedia, and having used the automatic reference creation tool by inputting the ISBN, I am a little lost as to what was wrong with it. Please could you explain it to me. Thanks in advance Zimothy (talk) 00:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

@Zimothy: The |url= parameter is for the URL of an online location where the text of the publication named by title can be found and continues use ... |oclc= to provide neutral search links for books, but that is not how you were using it. By using |url=, what you had done was create a duplicate of the link that is automatically generated by the |oclc=233788958 parameter that you had also provided. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:27, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Starting line-ups

Hello! I was talking about line-up images for the specific finals. Not team photos. E.g. the FA Cup-Finals from 1954 to 1989. And League Cup finals from 1961 until 1990. Cup Winners' Cup finals from 1961 to 1963, from 1969 to 1973, 1975, 1985 and 1986 and 1989. UEFA Cup Finals from 1972, 1974, 1976 to 1978, 1985, 1986 and 1987 and from 1990 to 1992. There must be sources for those line-ups that can be rather difficult to do. But see if you can find another user. Who can do it?. Yours sincerely, Sondre -- (talk) 14:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't know why you are asking me. All I did was move your post from Wikipedia talk:Village pump (technical), which is for discussion about the page Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) only; to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football, which is for general discussions of direct relevance to WikiProject Football. My decision to move had nothing to do with images of any kind, it was because you had posted in a completely irrelevant place. If you want to find people who can help to find photos, WikiProject Football is absolutely the right place to start asking. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Facilitating a merge discussion via RfC. Thank you. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)