User talk:Prof.Haddock

Merry XMAS.!

Prof.Haddock (talk) 16:04, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

British Railways DP1 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Great Northern Railway

Vectron (locomotive) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to MRCE

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to GE PowerHaul may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• <ref>{{citation| url=http://kurumsal.tcdd.gov.tr/home/detail/?id=1208| title = Kurumsal Haberler > ESKİŞEHİR EĞİTİM MERKEZİ MÜDÜRLÜĞÜNDE YENİ EĞİTİMLER| language = Turkish| work = kurumsal.tcdd.gov.
• be [[Hyundai Rotem]] for passenger and freight services from 2014. (25 units)<ref name="hhp1" /> (see also [[:ko:한국철도공사 7600호대 디젤 기관차|한국철도공사 7600호대 디젤 기관차 (Korail Class 7600)]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to O. S. Nock may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• written as part of his journalism correspondence course ''Hyde Park's ghost trains'' also in 1932);{{sfn|Vanns|2004|loc=para.4}} Due to his moonlighting as a journalist ([[unreported employment]])

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:13, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

O. S. Nock (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Westinghouse, Reading, The Star and Boarder

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:34, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited GE PowerHaul, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages TCDD and British Rail Class 70 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Prof.Haddock. You have new messages at Soetermans's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

By any change, are you the same person as Oranjblud (talk · contribs · count)? Just curious. Beagel (talk) 06:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited RENFE Class 319, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EMD (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vossloh Eurolight, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carlisle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Liverpool Street station (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Enfield railway station and Gothic

British Rail Class 700 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Denham

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doncaster Carr rail depot, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Great Northern Railway and Frodingham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Burbo Bank Offshore Wind Farm, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Wirral, National Grid and Sefton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeking a 3rd opinion on an issue with the London Array article. Editor User:Johnfos and I have a disagreement over whether to include the sentence: "It was formally inaugurated by the British prime minister David Cameron on 4 July 2013." My concern is that it places too much weight on one person who may not be actively involved with the project. I am also concerned that David Cameron may have withdrawn his support for onshore wind power and possibly offshore support will be withdrawn next. Thank you. Brian Everlasting (talk) 01:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Gunfleet Sands Offshore Wind Farm may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• which steps up the tranmission voltage to 132kV; the export cable makes landfall at Holland Havev (nr. [[Holland-on-Sea]], and connects to the the [[National Grid]] at the existing Cooks Green

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:23, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Rail1435. You got some doubt on informations I have posted one year before. I replaced your question by a reference to the order. You can find informations on 2 3xBoBo and 8 2xBoBo for Shenhua Mining Groupe on chinese web, and chinese Wiki for HXD1.

Thanks for uploading File:HXD2F-002 twin section locomotive CNR Datong.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:46, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Vossloh Eurolight page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:37, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Alstom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Ruston, Paxman and Les Echos

Gunfleet Sands Offshore Wind Farm (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to National Grid and Department of Trade and Industry

Intercity Express Programme (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to AWS and TPWS

Celtic Array (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to National grid

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Navitus Bay wind farm, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mannington and National Grid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited London Array, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Trade and Industry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to British Rail may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |at = Railways| title = Labour Party Manifesto| year = 1997| work = http://www.labour-party.org.uk (website unaffiliated with the official Labour Party}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Manor House Street railway station may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited British Rail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Labour party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hull to Scarborough Line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seamer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Station disambiguation (June 2014). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hullshire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Newland, Willerby, William Constable, Burgess and Myton

American Radiator Company (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Oil crisis, Acrylic and American Standard

Cliffe, Selby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to River Ouse

Hull and Selby Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Seamer

Manor House Street railway station (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James Walker

Wressle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cliffe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Stepney, Kingston upon Hull (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Turnpike and Stepney railway station

Hull Blitz (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Edwin Davis

Shepherd (surname) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Thomas Sheppard

Spaldington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to River Derwent

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As you have found historic stuff on Sculcoates Union Workhouse leading to Kingston General Hospital, why not try an article on it ? - it would be a useful add. Cheers. Acabashi (talk) 19:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not one that I'm planning to write an article on I'm afraid. I presume you are in the UK. A library card should give you access to The Times archive and the Gale News Vault, both useful sources for writing articles. Mjroots (talk) 06:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Malton and Driffield Junction Railway may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Wetwang]], [[Garton railway station|Garton]]; and used [[Malton railway station|Malton] station]] and [[Driffield railway station|Driffield station]] as termini.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Alstom

added a link pointing to EDF

Hull Blitz

added a link pointing to Willerby

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

James Oldham (engineer)

added links pointing to Baltic, New Holland and Gainsborough

Leeds and York Railway

added links pointing to Acomb and Magnesian limestone

Port of Hull

added a link pointing to Hanson

York to Beverley Line

added a link pointing to Huntington

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Reckitt and Sons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Prince Sulaiman (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thanks for creating so many nice articles about companies. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that just because someone else hasnt got here earlier on this issue, that it isnt important - you are heavily over-categorizing - specially with categories that are parent categories with child categories - there is stuff at WP:Categories about this - but you really need to lighten up on applying every category in the book to small stubs like the Hull to York line - half of those categories are redundant. Please take this in good faith and think seriously about (a) removing parent categories (b) reading up about categories. satusuro 01:20, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply - maybe you could help by cleaning them up them - too many - with parent cats added where they are not needed... satusuro 03:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Selby railway station

added links pointing to River Ouse and BOCM

ANF Industrie

added a link pointing to Oil crisis

British Rail Class 700

added a link pointing to National Audit Office

Intercity Express Programme

added a link pointing to National Audit Office

Jeumont-Schneider

added a link pointing to Bosch

R68 (New York City Subway car)

added a link pointing to Westinghouse

Selby Diversion

added a link pointing to River Derwent

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Holgate Road carriage works, York page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:39, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article! Asdklf; (talk) 21:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hull and Doncaster branch

added links pointing to River Ouse, Great Northern Railway, Laxton and Thorne

Gilkes Wilson and Company

added a link pointing to Tay Bridge

Holgate Road carriage works, York

added a link pointing to Trafalgar House

York to Beverley Line

added a link pointing to River Derwent

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...accusing people of vandalism when their edits do not meet the strict definition of vandalism is a personal attack and can lead to a block. By the way, I clicked one of those supposed references, and it wasn't. Please DISCUSS on the article talkpage in order to obtain consensus for all additions, especially if someone disagrees with the addition/citation the panda ₯’ 21:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you click on a "dead link" ? Prof.Haddock (talk)

Hi, if you use {{merge}} on two different articles that you wish to become one, you should ensure that the "Discuss" link points to the same place. At Wincobank railway station, the "Discuss" link points to Talk:Wincobank railway station; whereas at Meadow Hall and Wincobank railway station, the "Discuss" link points to Talk:Meadow Hall and Wincobank railway station. In neither case does it link to a section. The {{merge}} template provides a |discuss= parameter which allows both to be set, as in |discuss=Talk:Wincobank railway station#Merge proposal. Alternatively, if you had used {{merge to}} on one, and {{merge from}} on the other, the "Discuss" links would have pointed to the same page - the talk page for the article which bears the {{merge from}} (but to specify the discussion section you'd still need to use |discuss=Talk:Wincobank railway station#Merge proposal).

Also, you have not started a discussion on either talk page; I would like to comment on the proposal, but I don't know where to do so. There is more information at WP:MERGE#Proposing a merger. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks. I've actually withdrawn the merge proposal as it seems the two stations are different..

eg this map http://maps.nls.uk/view/100949903#zoom=4&lat=3501&lon=3316&layers=BT (ones north of center, the other just south..) it's "X & Y station" and "Y & X station" existing at the same time.

The articles are still confusing as per naming and history. But I don't have the info right yet to fix them.Prof.Haddock (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, different stations, on different lines which belonged to different companies right down to 1948. Meadow Hall (a.k.a. Meadow Hall and Wincobank) was on the MS&LR/GCR/LNER, whilst Wincobank (a.k.a. Wincobank and Meadow Hall) was on the Midland/LMS. See the 1912 RCH Junction Diagram no. 67, where they are respectively shown as Meadow Hall & Wincobank (on the pink route between Tinsley and Barnsley), and Wincobank & Meadow Hall (on the green route between Sheffiend (Pond Street) and Leeds). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Paull

added links pointing to Henry VII, War Department, William Chapman, Wesleyan Methodist, Thorne and Henry II

Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, Wakefield, Huddersfield and Goole Railway

added links pointing to Carlton, Cudworth and Tankersley

South Yorkshire Railway

added links pointing to Swinton and Stainforth

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when creating a category for the stations of a former railway company, please remember to include the word "Former" in the cat name, that is, Category:Former South Yorkshire Railway stations and not Category:South Yorkshire Railway stations. It's a convention that has been in place for several years. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:57, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As one of the original editors on this diagram, I have to say that a brief look at my copy of Jowett tells me you have a point. I will try to modify the area around Doncaster and think of a way of pointing up the ends of the joint line more clearly. Britmax (talk) 09:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barnsley Coal Railway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ardsley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hatfield Colliery, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lincoln, Department of Trade and Industry and Mothballed. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Barton-upon-Humber may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• for ages 11–18 on Barrow Road. There are also three primary schools, St Peter's Church of England], on Marsh Lane;<ref>http://www.barton-st-peters.n-lincs.sch.uk/</ref> the Castledyke Primary

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Immingham Power Station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• was operated by energy company [[ConocoPhillips]] from opening in 2004, until its sale to [Vitol]] in 2013.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Healing, Lincolnshire may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Survey Sheet 22NW 1905-6</ref> A methodist chapel had also been established, built 1906 in the ''[[Arts and Crafts'' style.<ref>{{citation|work = The Buildings of England| title = Licolnshire| first

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Cross Gates to Wetherby Line may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 1370000|cuyd}}; the largest bridge on the line was over the [[river Wharfe]] with twin spans of {{convert|120|ft} with a central pier of two cast iron columns.<ref>{{citation| url = http://www.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:42, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Stoneferry page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

European emission standards

added a link pointing to Off road

Humber Refinery

added a link pointing to Combined Heat and Power

Nirex

added a link pointing to Bradwell

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect British Portland Cement Manufacturers. Since you had some involvement with the British Portland Cement Manufacturers redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:57, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

You reverted my edit/s on Parisi (Yorkshire) with the edit summary (rv "The North-south Divide: The Origins of Northern Consciousness in England" is not a reliable pre-history source, the MOS was right before, and google books links for non-free works are of no use). As I explained in my revision The North-south Divide: The Origins of Northern Consciousness in England may be on Google books but it is published by Manchester University Press, official press of said University, and I consider it as RS. Also, your revision removed what was solely formatting to unbundle sources to allow further additions from those sources as refnames. Happy to take this to the RS noticeboard if you still disagree and want broader input.

Cheers, AnonNep (talk) 15:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply on the article talk page. Prof.Haddock (talk) 15:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed page link, still reverted as it removed existing edits where I only formatted for later additions (will also place on Talk page). AnonNep (talk) 17:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Following your additional revert/comments I've posted a query to RS Noticeboard for broader feedback. AnonNep (talk) 19:01, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Stallingborough page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Stallingborough

added links pointing to Henry III and 2011 census

Able UK

added a link pointing to Seaton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from the WikiProject Elements. --Stone (talk) 14:49, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe you could make the effort to try and fill in the gaps yourself? Yes I know its not your responsibility, but surely more productive than littering an article with hatnotes. Just a thought. Bbjet (talk) 21:08, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Southcoates, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flyover. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I refer to your recent edit at James Oldham (engineer) Please see WP:FNNR, I quote for your convenience

Title: Editors may use any section title that they choose. The most frequent choice is "References"; other articles use "Notes", "Footnotes", or "Works cited" (in diminishing order of popularity) for this material. Several alternate titles ("Sources", "Citations", "Bibliography") may also be used, although each is problematic in some contexts: "Sources" may be confused with source code in computer-related articles, product purchase locations, river origins, Journalism sourcing, etc

Wayne Jayes (talk) 10:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the record I am not a sock of Special:Contributions/Bbjet, I will leave for you to open a SPI should you feel the need. The article was in need of a copy edit and had some errors, which I notice you have reintroduced, eg the successor to EWS was not North & South, it was the 5 companies that were purchased. D47817 (talk) 23:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking more closely, what you have done is reinstate large parts of the article. As it stands, it doesn't flow, and in parts is down right awful. More work required. Good idea getting rid of the fleet table, but the replacement has errors, EWS haven't operated 37s for at least 5 years, and the last 47s were withdrawn in mid-2004. Either way source doesn't appear reliable, think we need to use wnxx or the trade magazines to get anything accurate. D47817 (talk) 23:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cite was dead, I reactivated job done. As long as it is linked, title given, publisher credited and dated then that's all the reader requires. Cite formatting is a trivial sideshow. D47817 (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if you don't like some of my posts, but this is wiki. Contrary to the assertion, I am here to improve articles, not 'piss off' other editors off. But report if you must. The article needed work, and I think I have contributed, article had 60 cites 24 hours ago, now has 100. D47817 (talk) 15:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your change to the BBC cite on the Royal Mail cessation doesn't appear to have been actioned correctly, as a red link with 'missing title' has appeared. Can you please amend, I could just reverse but don't want to 'piss around with work that doesn't need improving'. Thank you D47817 (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Swanland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prefab. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing accessdate=. This is extremely unhelpful and disruptive to the encyclopaedia. For example [1], statistics get updated over time, and it is necessary to know when they were precisely retrieved. For material such as DB's plan to serve London by ICE, the same page has been repeatedly updated over the last five years with new dates. When hunting for archiveurl= replacements it is necessary to know which is the closest revision of a page to the one the editor original saw, again by going by the accessdate=. I have already noted [2] that the sentence you are basing your disruptive edits on was made by an anonymous IP, without discussion. Other discussions on Template talk:Citation#Date_range_produces_an_error discuss "it would not be appropriate to indicate any date later than the date when the editor was reading it, because we have no idea if the website might be modified after the editor read it so that it no longer supports the statement in the article." similarly indicate the necessity of having accessdate= universal. It is an occasional inconvenience when a new editor does not add a accessdate= but that is nothing compared to the amount of disruption caused by an editor actively removing it when already there. To be clear, it is extremely unhelpful, and disruptive.

I'm sure your fellow editors would be grateful if you could assist in self-reverting the removals going back to whenever this sequence of edits was started. —Sladen (talk) 19:25, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No you are just wrong. When a document has been published by a reliable source with a date then that date is all that is needed. For example a book published with a publication date, a newspaper, or newsite, published on a certain date, etc.

The 2001 or 2011 census statistics are not going to be updated ever such as at Kirk Ella and West Ella - because they are fixed in time - they do not need accessdates - because the data should be and is unchanging.Prof.Haddock (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re- archiveurls - for a published reliable source the publication date is sufficient - if the content of a (dated) source is changing over time then it is mostly likely not a reliable source. All reliable sources note and update their dates when they change content (eg BBC, Times, reuters etc).

I always leave accessdates in when they are necessary - ie for sources that are undated, as you can verify from my edits.Prof.Haddock (talk) 19:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I need to emphasise the 3rd paragraph above - if you are sourcing from a "dated" publication and that publication is changing their content after the publication date they have given - then you have a problem with the source.Prof.Haddock (talk) 19:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the DB ICE source http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/high-speed/db-puts-london-%E2%80%93-frankfurt-high-speed-plans-on-ice.html - you would see that the cited article covers the entire history of DB's plans for the ICE service .It does not "change over time" as it was published first (and finally) in 2014 and summarises previous developments. Possibly previous versions may have relied on changing sources - but the present version does not.

I appreciate the issue with content that is not stable - but adding accessdates to stable content is completely uneccessary - it is appropriate to label it as "spam" - just because people haven't yet got the idea of what is and is not needed in a citation is not a factor - ie just because other people are doing it wrong is not reason to continue to do so.Prof.Haddock (talk) 19:47, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on St Pancras railway station. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. This is related to the above. Stable or not, there is a good reason to keep accessdates. Should a website disappear, having an accessdate makes it easier to use the Wayback Machine. Mjroots (talk) 20:08, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reverted by a number of editors. That should be a sign that you are in the minority on this one. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it would appear that this issue needs much wider discussion, possibly by means of a WP:RFC at the template's talk page. As I understand it, one of the reasons is that which I gave above. Mjroots (talk) 20:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Mjroots (talk) 20:58, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Prof.Haddock (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This is a totally unwarranted block - I have been applying well established guidlines, and communicating clearly with editors attempting to explain those guildiness - if editors had taken notice of what I had written - which they clearly have not this issue would not have arisen. Prof.Haddock (talk) 21:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Fully warranted. WP:BRD is clear: you make an edit, if it gets reverted, you must discuss and NOT re-make the edit until consensus is reached to include it. Just because you begin the discussion, it doesn't mean you can make the edit. If you had taken notice of the rules, this issue would not have arisen the panda ₯’ 21:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please consider contributing to the discussion at Template talk:Citation#Access date. Again. —Sladen (talk) 07:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may remove the block and appeal notices now if you wish. Just to be clear, you were already at a point where a block would have been in order. However I used my discretion to warn you. I only blocked you after you reverted again, and would have been justified in giving a much longer block. You're fairly new here, so I took a more lenient course of action. Mjroots (talk) 21:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hatfield Colliery

added a link pointing to National Union of Mineworkers

Kirk Ella and West Ella

added a link pointing to Willerby

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of Oranjblud (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edits on Template:Bombardier Transportation per WP:BRD and WP:WTAF. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Jax 0677: Edits that Prof.Haddock made over two years ago, and moreover, made just five days after your previous edit to the template. I can't help wondering why you didn't start discussing it back in August 2014, per WP:BRD. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:36, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Lucas and Aird has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:59, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hull & Barnsley Railway (inline) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jc86035 (talk) 04:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]