Jump to content

User talk:Keith D/Archive 57

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Keith D

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Leeds United FC fan (talk | contribs) at 19:26, 9 November 2016 (→Regarding Leeds merger). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Welcome!

Hello, Keith D, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Alex (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Laird

Please check new edits Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.36.6 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Princess Michael of Kent & Lady Nicholas Windsor

Please check refs on these biographical two pages Thanks as always Mike E. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.36.6 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Bradford

I consider there is a problem of consistency with the naming of some Wikipedia articles on areas within The City of Bradford.

I don't see a problem with the following here as if you wish to differentiate them from other articles of a similar name then adding Bradford is the logical way to go.

Belle Vue, Bradford Broomfields, Bradford Cottingley, Bradford Girlington, Bradford Little Germany, Bradford Longlands, Bradford Low Moor, Bradford Manningham, Bradford Royds, Bradford

However, The following areas are described and differentiated as being in West Yorkshire, when for consistency of naming I think these should be described as being in Bradford.

Allerton, West Yorkshire Clayton, West Yorkshire Eccleshill, West Yorkshire Harden, West Yorkshire Heaton, West Yorkshire Idle, West Yorkshire Oakenshaw, West Yorkshire Queensbury, West Yorkshire Ravenscliffe, West Yorkshire Sandy Lane, West Yorkshire Shipley, West Yorkshire Thornbury, West Yorkshire Thornton, West Yorkshire Tong, West Yorkshire Trident, West Yorkshire

My Questions then:

1. Would it be a good idea to 'Move' these articles to a ', Bradford' extension - or is it better to just tolerate the inconsistency?

2. Is it possible to be confident that the right name change is being contemplated?

I would appreciate your opinion and advice on this. Or should this be opened for wider discussion? If so where?
Stuffed Cat (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I would tolerate the inconsistency rather than moving the articles. Personally I would go the other way and have all of then as West Yorkshire rather than Bradford unless there is more than 1 of the same name in West Yorkshire than you would have to go to district. Keith D (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Glen Affric

Hi Keith, I have done some final editing on this page. Please check if you can find the time and leave in all quotes. Thanks again Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.30.213 (talk) 11:02, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 09:03, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-35

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Wikimedia mobile sites now don't load images if the user doesn't see them. This is to save mobile data and make the pages load faster. [1]
  • When you edit a table with the visual editor, pressing Tab in the last cell of a row will take you to the first cell in the next row. Pressing Shift and Tab in the first cell of a row will take you to the last cell in the previous row. [2]

Changes this week

  • The name of the "Save page" button will change. The button will say "Publish page" when you create a new page. It will say "Publish changes" when you change an existing page. [3][4]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 30 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 31 August. It will be on all wikis from 1 September (calendar).

Meetings

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:01, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

James Matthews (racing driver)

Plesae check my recent edits on this page. You continue to be so helpful - ref numbers 5 and 6 should be done in the same style I think. Srbernadette (talk) 05:52, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done - looks like someone else has done some changes since your edits. Keith D (talk) 09:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2016

Delivered September 2016 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

22:36, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-36

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Word-level diffs now work in longer paragraphs. [5]
  • Interactive maps now have a frame by default. This is to make them look like other multimedia objects. This affects all Wikivoyages, the Catalan, Hebrew, Macedonian Wikipedias and Meta. [6]
  • When you preview the MediaWiki:Captcha-ip-whitelist page it will show a validation output of the listed IP addresses instead of the list of addresses only. This can help you to identify if your whitelist rules will work or not. [7]

Changes this week

  • You will be able to use <maplink> on all Wikipedias. It creates a link to a full screen map. [8][9]
  • Sometimes when you mention another user they don't get a notification. You will be able to get a notification when you successfully send out a mention to someone or be told if they did not get a notification. This will be opt-in. [10][11]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 September. It will be on all wikis from 8 September (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 6 September at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-37

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • The Wikimedia Commons app for Android can now show nearby places that need photos. [13]
  • <maplink> and <mapframe> can now use geodata from Open Street Map if Open Street Map has defined a region and given it an ID in Wikidata. You can use this to draw on the map and add information. [14][15]

Changes this week

  • The RevisionSlider will be available as a beta feature on all wikis from 13 September. This will make it easier to navigate between diffs in the page history. [16]
  • A new user right will allow most users to change the content model of pages. [17][18]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 13 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 14 September. It will be on all wikis from 15 September (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 13 September at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge

Hi. I've noticed the good work you do on here. I was wondering if you'd be interested in contributing to this ambitious British Isles challenge to bringing about 10,000 improvements to the UK and Ireland. The drive is fuelled by regional contests every few months, but it general an ongoing content improvement development. If you'd be interested in chipping in with the articles you improve please add your name to the participants and start adding your entries to the big list. Diversity of input will make it much more interesting to peruse! Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Changing date formats by script

When you change date formats, please make sure you haven't converted the UK and Scottish date parameters of Template:Single chart from YYYY-MM-DD, which they need to be in order to work properly, as you did this at This Is What You Came For. It's all good to make date formats consistent—I do it myself—but the UK and Scottish single chart templates' date needs to stay YYYY-MM-DD to link to the archive on officialcharts.com. Thanks. Ss112 19:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Must say this is confusing and not expected. May be the script needs modifying to avoid changing this parameter as lots of people use the script, and like me, have no knowledge of the requirements of this template. Keith D (talk) 19:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Please check ref number 3 it is from an online mag. And I am not sure what to put as the publisher thanks as always. M.101.182.142.35 (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Lupton family

Please check recent edits on this page of that's OK Thanks again M — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.142.35 (talk) 07:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Naughtiest Girl

Please check recent edit101.182.142.35 (talk) 06:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Princess Eugenie of York

Please check recent edits if you are able. Always thanking you.101.182.142.35 (talk) 06:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Princess Eugenie of York

Please - I know you have already done so, but please check my more recent edits to this page if you r able. Thanks so much. 101.182.142.35 (talk) 13:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Had a look but looks OK. Keith D (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-38

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will hopefully be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 20 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 21 September. It will be on all wikis from 22 September (calendar). This is the version that was meant to go out last week.

Meetings

Future changes

  • Wikidata will start working on adding support for Wiktionary. The Wikidata development team is now taking one last look at the development plan. [21]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Keith D. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

About the main Wikipedia page for Leeds

Hi, Keith

I wanted to have a discussion about the main Leeds Wikipedia page. Why did you revert the page back when I added the metro and Built-up area statistics? I don't see the reasoning behind it, that is the main Wikipedia page for Leeds, hence all the information on that page that refers to more than just the urban subdivision (Which has had no real relevance since 1974). The page you try to link me to has no more relevance to the statistics I added than the main Leeds Wikipedia page that you seem to keep reverting back for what ever reason. You can look at countless other Wikipedia pages that have all the relevant statistics that I was trying to add to the Leeds Wikipedia page. The London and Manchester pages are a couple of examples. Are you telling me that they should be edited as well? 

Lad 2011 (talk) 13:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Along with the other editor who reverted the addition there is a distinction between Leeds and City of Leeds. The Leeds page is about the settlement of Leeds not the Metropolitan Borough of Leeds which is located at City of Leeds. The statistics on the metro borough and the wider Leeds area should be placed in the City of Leeds article rather than in Leeds which covers, or should cover only the core settlement. I think we need a wider view from other regular editors on this. Keith D (talk) 20:07, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


So why does this only apply to the Leeds Wikipedia page then? It seems rather odd not to allow the statistics to be added to the main Leeds Wikipedia page if you ask me. The excuse that the page is just for the settlement has no relevance, and when it comes down to it the settlement is indefinable. The Urban subdivision certainly isn't the settlement, so where does this drivel come from? The main Wikipedia page for Leeds has information on that covers more than just the urban subdivision so the settlement argument goes straight out the window. Lad 2011 (talk) 23:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

The Leeds page, that you keep calling the main page, is the page for the settlement of Leeds, which is only part of the metropolitan borough. The lead of the article should make this distinction clear and not include intricate details of the wider metropolitan borough. These details, as I have4 said before, should be placed in the article City of Leeds which is the main article covering the metropolitan borough. We have made a distinction between the two entities and this distinction should be retained. As indicated above we need a wider view from regular editors on this. Keith D (talk) 20:14, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


Who has made the distinction exactly? I'm sorry but Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia based on factual information. There is no definable settlement of Leeds, so your argument is completely flawed to begin with. And you are still not answering the questions on why this only applies to the Leeds page and not the rest, and why the Leeds page has information on there that covers the entire City of Leeds yet according to you that page is only for the settlement? And no the distinction shouldn't be retained if it has no solid facts behind it. I've tried to contact the other editor who reverted the page back as well, although I am yet to hear back from him. And When it comes down to it I still don't see the problem of having the details on both pages. It comes across to me that there is some agenda driven drivel going on. Lad 2011 (talk) 00:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The decision is a community decision to have separate pages for the settlement and the metropolitan borough. If you look back through the archives you will see that there is a decision to split out the existing information on the borough from the settlement article and work was started on this but seems to have stalled for the moment. Information should not be duplicated across the pages as they can easily get out of sync and does not apply on one of the pages. If it was to be put on Leeds then it should also to be put on other articles such as Guiseley, Otley, Pudsey etc. Keith D (talk) 19:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


So there we have it's a distinction made by the community of Wikipedia, based on no factual information at all. This shouldn't even be allowed to happen, this is Wikipedia not some guys made up interpretation of what Leeds is. And no that is not how it works, Leeds expanded in 1974 swallowing up the likes of the Pudsey and the other towns, These are no longer independent towns. So suggesting these pages would need the info too is utter rubbish. The only pages that would require this are independent towns and cities in the West Yorkshire Metropolitan area, So the likes of Bradford, Wakefield, Huddersfield and Dewsbury etc. There is no define settlement of Leeds, And renaming the Urban subdivision the Leeds settlement or suggesting it's Leeds the city is complete misinformation and should be retracted from the article. We definitely do need to get in contact with the other editors about this. Lad 2011 (talk) 21:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@MRSC: Hi you were the main one working on the Talk:Leeds/draft article that was a split out of the info on the settlement of Leeds, the Talk:City of Leeds/draft never got off the ground. Do you think that the split work is worth progressing with? Keith D (talk) 23:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Pippa Middleton

Dear Keith, I have added other citations and there is a "cite error" tag near ref number 10 on my i phone - but it is NOT on my lap top! Confused! I hope this is OK - thanks for checking if you have time101.182.142.35 (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

I have tweaked the ref, but do not see any error from PC, could be just the mobile site. If you are still getting a problem may be you could report it at WP:VPT for someone to look at. Keith D (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-39

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • If your wiki wants numerical sorting in categories you can request it after a community decision. See how to request it. [22]
  • When you edit text and mention a new username they are notified if you add your signature. Before this only happened under certain conditions. [23]
  • Users are notified if they are mentioned in a section where you add your own signature even if you edit more than one section. Before, users were not notified if you edited more than one section in one edit. [24]

Problems

Changes this week

  • There will be no new MediaWiki version this week. [27]

Meetings

Future changes

  • Abandoned tools on Tool Labs could be taken over by other developers. There is a new discussion on Meta about this. It will be discussed until 12 October and then voted on. [28]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2016

Delivered October 2016 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

20:28, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-40

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 4 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 5 October. It will be on all wikis from 6 October (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 4 October at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Tidy will be replaced. Instead the HTML 5 parsing algorithm will be used to clean up bad HTML in wikitext. This would cause problems on a number of wikis. They need to be fixed first. [29]
  • <slippymap> will not work on Wikivoyage after 24 October. You should use <mapframe> instead. If you need help to fix this before 24 October you should ask for it as soon as possible. [30]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

References?

hello keith D - apologies for taking up your time with my references on Steven Croft page. And thanks for tidying them. I'm not sure exactly what I should be doing to make references correct? Or is it an admin thing required to make sure references are kosher? Thanks for any pointers Joelionheart (talk) 20:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, no it is not specifically an admin thing. The problem was that the entries that you added were just bare URLs which are subject to link rot, by adding the other information, such as the publisher, publication date, author, accessdate etc. then if the link goes dead it may be possible to track down an archive version or a suitable replacement. It is easier to use {{cite web}} or one of the other {{citation}} templates to keep them in the same format rather than hand format each reference. Keith D (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Michael Dawson (footballer)

Well, I think I am finished with it for now. I wanted to bring it up to B rating standard, what do you think? I might move over to Aaron Lennon article and start working on that, I thought it needed a lot of tidy up. Govvy (talk) 11:20, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

A few formatting problems, but a quick glance and it looks OK for a B-class. Main problem on the refs is the mix of last/first and first/last format for authors, these tend to be done as last/first format now rather than as first/last. Keith D (talk) 11:30, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
hmm, I use the element author in the citations, I really don't like the last to first for naming convention as citations go, it's not using a sort so I don't see the point of last/first but for readability it's better to use first/last. I didn't know there was supposed to be a standard format. Govvy (talk) 16:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I do not think there is a standard format, just internal consistency in the article. Keith D (talk) 17:12, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

You deleted my content?

Keith, we don't know each other well but I feel as if we've made a undeniable connection through the several messages you have sent me where you informed me that yo have deleted my improvements to the wath comprehensive school page, whuddup wit dat? I would like to talk about a few problems I have with you, Kevin, deleting my content. Firstly, I AM single so hmu. Secondly, I am very familiar with wath com and the people that attend and run it, I know what names they prefer (such as big dog Taylor likes to be called "dat boi") I am making improvements Keith, whether you can see it or not I am changing the world one small step at a time.

I am not having a go at you, Keith D, in fact from my brief stalking of your profile I know you've won awards to take down vandalism and inappropriate content. I see how you're clearly mistaking my helpful improvements and nothing but crude banter, I can assure you that I was actually doing good with what I edited.

I need you to understand me Keith when I say that I'm not here to make friends and I will in fact take you out if I have to. I already have friends Keith, the costa staff are my friends, wath comp staff are my friends, the people are my friends and I hope one day, you will be my friend too, keith.

Choose your actions wisely:))

Yours faithfully buster_nutt69 

Buster nutt69 (talk) 19:06, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-41

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can show Special:RecentChanges on a page by using {{Special:RecentChanges}}. You can now use tag filters by using {{Special:RecentChanges/tagfilter=tagname}}. [31]
  • The notification badge is coloured if you have notifications. When you check the notification the badge will now turn grey on all wikis instead of just the local one. [32]
  • Colours used in the Wikimedia wikis' main interface changed slightly. This is to make them easier to see for readers and editors with reduced eyesight. [33]

Changes this week

  • Hidden HTML comments will be more visible when you edit with the visual editor. <!-- You write hidden HTML comments like this. --> [34]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 11 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 12 October. It will be on all wikis from 13 October (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

  • Language converter syntax will soon no longer work inside external links. Wikitext like http://-{zh-cn:foo.com; zh-hk:bar.com; zh-tw:baz.com}- must be replaced. You will have to write -{zh-cn: http://foo.com ; zh-hk: http://bar.com ; zh-tw:http://baz.com }- instead. This only affects languages with Language Converter enabled. Examples of such languages are Chinese and Serbian. [35]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Harewood Castle

Hi Keith; Harewood Castle is still a work in progress. I don't remember removing Leeds from it and as such it was an accident. I will put it back tonight when I am back from work.

Apologies and I hope all is well with you. Regards. (PS - thanks for picking up the REF Harv error too!)The joy of all things (talk) 06:59, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

No it was me that removed Leeds as it really should be City of Leeds but rather than confuse people I felt that it should be removed. Keith D (talk) 10:37, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Happy days; I feel less of a biff now! Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 12:55, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-42

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Problems

  • Some users got a warning about Wikipedia's security certificate last week. This was because of a problem GlobalSign had. This has now been fixed. Only a small number of users got the warning. [36]
  • Editors couldn't edit semi-protected pages in the Wikipedia app for Android. This has now been fixed in the beta version. [37]

Changes this week

  • There will be no new MediaWiki version this week. [38]

Future changes

  • The Editing Department are working on a new wikitext editor. It will have tools that are in the visual editor but not in the wikitext editor today. You can read more about this. This is an early plan and things can change. The old wikitext editor will still exist.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:42, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Contactmusic.com

Hi, Keith D. One of the clean-up articles that has appeared this week is Contactmusic.com and has a listing for potentially dated statements from May 2016. I have been through line by line and I cannot see anything. The history states that it wasn't created until July 2016, so I am at a loss to explain it. Could you have a look and see, please? Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 11:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I have no idea how it got May 2016 for the category, it should be July 2016. The problem was from the date arguments to the {{as of}} template in the infobox being in the wrong order which I have fixed. Keith D (talk) 12:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Keith. I looked at the diff and I have seen what you corrected (can't believe that I did not see that!). Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 12:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-43

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

  • The abuse filters had a problem and caught too many edits. This has now been fixed. [39]

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from October 25. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from October 26. It will be on all wikis from October 27 (calendar).
  • The "Search" text in the search box will show the name of the project. For example, on Wikipedia it will say "Search Wikipedia". [40]
  • About a dozen wikis now have numerical sorting in categories. If your wiki wants numerical sorting in categories you can ask for it. [41]
  • Some wikis that want numerical sorting in categories can also ask to use UCA to sort categories. The biggest difference is that characters with diacritics will be sorted together. For example, for most languages Ä will be sorted with A instead of at the end of the alphabet. This is not true for languages that have Ä as a character in their alphabet. Wikis that already use UCA are listed on Meta. Languages that can use UCA are listed on MediaWiki.org. You can test it.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:39, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

I think that at the page's beginning, it should read as: Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (née Kate Middleton). There should not be comma after Catherine. What do you think? Please correct if necessary. As always - Thanks Keith. 101.182.180.24 (talk) 08:00, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I have removed a comma as it is covered by the bracket. Keith D (talk) 00:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Mineralogy.

Dear Keith,

I have noticed, that you have made a contribution to the article Mineralogy - a field of science, which I’m considering, as a very important and endlessly fascinating one, which deserves to the nth degree, as I think, to have its own Wikipedia Mineralogy Barnstar, and if you agree with this opinion and will find the design of the Mineralogy Barnstar as a good one, please, give your support in the section Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards. This section not visited very often by Wikipedians, and the authors of new Barnstars usually invite for discussion those Editors, who are interested in the related fields of science, art, etc. This Sunday morning (30/10) I have uploaded Mineralogy Barnstar to the following section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards Complete description of this Barnstar is possible to find on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mineralogy

Regards, Chris.Chris Oxford (talk) 16:51, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Hi Keith Thanks in advance again. I cannot do a link in the History section of this page - to the section below titled "Generations of Middleton lawyers'. The link would be on the name: William Middleton Esq. (Esquire also having a link on it). Please help Srbernadette (talk) 00:37, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

I have added the closing brackets which now forms a link. Keith D (talk) 00:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Keith

St Margaret's School, Melbourne

Please check recent edits

and also if you can,

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

please check ref. number 10 - the dates seem to be wrong. Thanks again Srbernadette (talk) 05:47, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-44

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Now you can include Commons video films with subtitles in your wiki language. Before you could see translated videos on file page at Commons only. [42]
  • Search now has an updated preference tab to configure the search completion suggester. [43]
  • The visual editor is now available on all wikis using only one language script. [44]

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 1st. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from November 2nd. It will be on all wikis from November 3rd (calendar).
  • Now you can use autocomplete for page names in "Preview page with this template (what's this?)" field when editing templates. [45]
  • Special:NewPages can now be filtered by page size. [46]

Future changes

  • New MediaWiki deployments will be now based on MediaWiki 1.29. [47]

Miscellaneous

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

There should be comma after the name Middleton - eg - William Middleton, Esq. - in the History section. Are you able to fix this please? thanks again so much, I am too scared that I will muck it all up!101.182.180.24 (talk) 10:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Coord template - position

Hi Keith, re your edit to Thackray Medical Museum, WP:LAYOUT specifies that the coords go near the bottom, after navbox and before categories.

I wasn't sure about where {{Use British English}} etc go, but have now convinced myself that they count as "Maintenance templates", so are correctly where you put them - just before infobox. Thanks. PamD 15:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - November 2016

Delivered November 2016 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

23:10, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Leeds and City of Leeds merger?

There is an article for 'Leeds', which is supposingly referring to the city in Leeds and an article for the 'City of Leeds', which is supposingly referring to the administrative region. I believe these articles should be merged, but before I propose a merger I'd like to consult you as you are one of the more active members of WikiProject Yorkshire.

From my understanding, cities of similar size are inconsistent; Sheffield does not have a seperate article for City of Sheffield (it looks like it once did but was merged into Sheffield?), yet its metropolitan boundaries include towns like Stocksbridge and Birmingham includes towns like Sutton Coldfield. The wikipedia article for Stocksbridge considers it a town within the Sheffield metropolitan borough, similar to places like Pudsey in the Leeds metropolitan borough whilst the wikipedia article for Sutton Coldfield considers it both a town within the Birmingham metropolitan borough and a suburb of Birmingham?

Furthermore, the infobox of Leeds contains 'City and Metropolitan borough' and includes information on places like Pudsey. The infobox of City of Leeds contains 'City and Metropolitan borough'. The articles for Sheffield and Birmingham contain the coat of arms of the city council, despite including towns and not having an article for the city council (as far as I can see).

I'm not too sure about the topic, and I'm (probably wrong!) so any input would be appreciated. Thanks!

Leeds United FC fan (talk) 17:43, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

More recent discussion is Talk:Leeds/Archive_/September_2009#Split
The reason for the single article for Sheffield / City of Sheffield is because the two are effectively the same. This is not the case for Leeds (the settlement) / City of Leeds (the whole of the metropolitan borough) where there are numerous other places in the City of Leeds which are not classified as Leeds, such as Pudsey. The last discussion on this resulted in retaining the split and a start was made to perform the split even more in line with Salford, Greater Manchester & City of Salford, which show it can be done effectively. I personally believe that that is the way to go because of the other towns in the borough and is the present consensus. Keith D (talk) 18:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Some of the information in the infobox has been recently added and probably needs removing such as to take out the MP info for all of the non-Leeds settlement. I have struggled with the Leeds articles because of the few, usually non-regular editors and IPs, who are for piling everything into a single article. Keith D (talk) 18:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. From my understanding then, Leeds should be limited to information about the legal city boundary? I am from Pudsey in the metropolitan borough and it is widely considered to be part of Leeds, so it's a strange situation. Also, perhaps there could be a draft rewrite by WikiProject Yorkshire members?
I'd have to disagree City of Sheffield and Sheffield are effectively the same though, Stocksbridge is a town in the City of Sheffield but it isn't within the city borders? Just like places such as Hollow Meadows among others in the Peak District National Park. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 19:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
It should be just about the settlement of Leeds, without information on all of the other towns, such as Pudsey which should be in that article. Things which are global to all of the settlements should go in the City of Leeds article, the council details in the Leeds City Council. A rewrite of the Leeds article was started but stalled I pinged @MRSC: the main author of that, that is still active, but they have not responded yet.
I would probably agree on Sheffield but that is what was said when it was suggested that that article should be split. It was one of the ones that it was decided to leave together.
Keith D (talk) 00:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
It's been seven years so I'm going to reopen the discussion. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
If you didn't see it's at the Leeds talk page, and is there any reason the 2016 Women's Tour de Yorkshire doesn't have the good article icon? Thanks (and sorry for all the questions). Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:35, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I have added the missing icon, it is usually added when the article is promoted but must have been forgotten for some reason.
I have also notified the projects about the Leeds merge as you appear to have only notified those who are looking for a merge. Keith D (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the good article template. Is it ok for me to add one if I see a missing article in future?
Sorry about that. I didn't intend to ask only the people who supported the merge, I just asked you as one of the main contributors to WikiProject Yorkshire and the most recent editors to the Leeds page (Of who I asked I was of the assumption you and Pam D support Split, one person hasn't voiced their opinion, and 2 others supported merge?). Anyway, thanks for notifying the WikiProject, hopefully there will be a wide range of opinions and we can conclude the best route to go down. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 18:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Thanks for all of your time. If you could do a check that recent edits are all ok - that would be great. Thanks Keith Srbernadette (talk) 22:05, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Berney baronets

Please do a check up - is the box up the top OK? I placed it there myself. Thanks again Srbernadette (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Berney baronets

Thanks keith. can u please place ref number 9 at the end of that paragraph - infront of reference number 10 and with all the other references that are at the end of that paragraph. Thanks so much. Thanks again. Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.180.24 (talk) 11:41, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

You r very quick Keith! The number 9 ref only needs to be at the end of that paragraph with all the other refs. it is repeated unnecessarily. Can u fix up please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.180.24 (talk) 11:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Hi Keith, I have added in a ref to a newspaper to a quote - can you check that it is ok please if you have the time. Srbernadette (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC) Please leave new quotes in. Thanks form Mike

Berney baronets

I have done the same as the above page - Hi Keith, I have added in a ref to a newspaper to a quote. Please leave new quotes in. Thanks as always Srbernadette (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I do not understand this addition. The quote should be from the main article noted in the reference. You appear to have extended the quote form a different source. As far as I can see this should be a separate reference. Keith D (talk) 23:32, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes - you are right. The extra information is from the on-line newspaper source. (It is newspaper number 12 - going down the list) http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/searchbna/results?memberlastsubclass=none&searchhistorykey=0&keywords=generak%20infirmary%20middleton%20princess%20mary%20leeds%20general%20informary%20%201932%20%20middleton&from=1920&to=1933

Above is the source - I will try to do this myself - please check up if you are able Thanks Mike

I have done it - and it looks OK to me - Can you please check

and also:

James Matthews (racing driver)

is it all OK? Thanks so much again, Mike

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

You will see that I have added some old newspaper reports as citations. I do hope that it is all OK. Can you please check - I have noticed that you sometimes place the name of the newspapers in italics - should that always be done? - it seem a good idea. Thanks again Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.180.24 (talk) 10:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, newspaper titles are always in italics. Keith D (talk) 10:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thnaks Keith

ONE LAST THING! Reference number 7 on the above page has a date - 26th February - which is not in the actual citation. It (the date) should be removed. The rest of the citation is fine. I am too scared to edit it in case I get it wrong. Thanks so much as usual. Mike

Tech News: 2016-45

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Victoria Coleman is the new Chief technology officer for the Wikimedia Foundation. [48]
  • First release candidate for MediaWiki 1.28 is now available. [49]
  • .gitreview for MediaWiki branches and extensions switched from targeting a specific branch to using track=1. [50]
  • Section numbers in Table of Contents boxes will use grey to improve readability. [51]

Changes this week

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 8 November 2016 at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topics this week are Image Thumbnail API and allow SVG files uploaded on MediaWiki to have XHTML namespaces. The meeting will be on 9 November at 21:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

23:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Sorry Keith Ref number 17 on this page also has the silly date in it -February 26 -; which should be removed - (but not the quote itself) Thanks so much Mike

Jamie Thackray

Why do you keep reverting my Edit if i have gotten the information and edited the changes with Jamie himself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexfr (talk • contribs) 09:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

See your talk page that I was editing when you sent this message. Keith D (talk) 09:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Leeds merger

Do you have any remaining concerns that could be addressed? Leeds United FC fan (talk) 18:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Most of your arguments are based on your thoughts / preferences and a large number of your statements are not backed up with any proof. The arguments you put forward are contradictory as to what should be done, especially over split for Birmingham and Sheffield articles. The most convincing argument for the split so far is the large percentage of population in the borough are not actually Leeds but some other place. Keith D (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
The main problem is that Leeds is widely used to refer to the majority of places in the metropolitan borough that are not in the urban subdivision. Surely a merged article would be more representative of 'Leeds' as it includes all the possible ways one could define Leeds; the urban subdivision, metropolitan borough and the non-legally defined area that is commonly referred to as Leeds? Leeds United FC fan (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Keith_D/Archive_57&oldid=748693635"