User talk:Pyrotec/Archive08Q4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Pyrotec. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

If you have a minute, could you take a look at todays new Hinkley Point C nuclear power station Thanks— Rod ^talk 16:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Its a wee village close to roybridge. It's very small. scope_creep (talk) 16:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Pyrotec. I saw your name listed on the GAN backlog elimination drive, and I was wondering if you could help me in the review of Lincolnshire. It's up for the second time, and I think it'll pass this time around.

Please get back to me as soon as you can.

Thanks, --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 15:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your improvements, and your GA-pass! Lampman (talk) 18:45, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

No bother, I've just spent an enjoyable afternoon watching the DVD a couple of times to check the synopsis.19:00, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

just to let you know, i have completed most of the problem areas you listed on the talk page. at the moment, i have been thinking it would be a good idea, like you say, to include more information on Michael Nairn & Co Ltd and this is where i will focus towards. the thing was i did not want to add too much information in the history section, that's why. maybe a little bit more information would not hurt. thanks for making the problem areas clear to me, otherwise i just would not know where they would have been!Kilnburn (talk) 22:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Pyrotec.

I've essentially addressed all the of the comments you have put up (with the exception of the one concerning the Jesuit missionaries, which I will fix right now). I just wanted to know if there was anything further that you wish for me to correct.

Thanks for all your help. --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 18:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article, I really appreciate it. Thanks for copy editing it too. Is there any chance you could also give me a hand in getting those wrong references sorted out?

• Ref 11 - I'm only really familiar with the "cite web" referencing. In the case of ref 11, what exactly do I need to replace this with to make ref 11 eligible?
• Ref 12 - This reference was taken from a news programme which I copied onto tape by myself. However, the only section of the news programme I have on the tape is that mentioning the power station and so I don't have a date of the broadcast which I could add to the reference. How do I sort this out?
• The closure section is based upon what I have been told, but I have had difficulty in finding references to back up what I have been told. However, the station's closure feels like a key point in the buildings history and, I feel, needs mentioning. The demolition dates I have taken from dates on photographs, such as [1] for the successful north station boiler demo (97 6 23 in bottom right hand corner) and a North East Tonight article on tape stating that the unsuccessful demolition had been the day before. The Stella south demos were taken from knowing that they took place the autumn before the stella norths (hence there being no dates). Do you know who or where I might ask to find the dates and references needed?
• I presume that with the ash removal citation problems you mean the fact that it's taken from a forum. How can this be resolved?

Cheers again for reviewing Fintan264 (talk) 21:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Right, I think I've now sorted out refs 11 and 12. I've also clarified the brick-cathedral thing by adding the sine reference which stated that stella was of such a design and removed the claim that it was one of the last in that sytle (which I probably shouldn't have presumed and added because it was built after the other brick cathederals and just before power station design turned to being sheet metal structures). I'll have a look into a northumberland or maybe durham pevsner book at a later date and add from it if I have any luck. The only thing I am still having trouble with are demolition references. Is the date on the photograph sufficient as a reference for some of the stella north demolition dates? The others I am still unsure about; the times' archive only goes up until 1985 and there are no results in the telegraph's search. The main local paper in newcastle is the chronicle, however using its search engine again bears no fruit. I'm a little clueless as to how to sort this out. Fintan264 (talk) 18:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah thank you! I'll work on getting them references when I have the time to contact The Chronicle or someone along them lines. Fintan264 (talk) 12:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've found, added and referenced the majority of those dates. I've got them all except the closure date, which has changed. I was just wondering if you could give the article a copy editing and see if I've missed out any mistakes I've made.Fintan264 (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing and passing Tubas as a good article, and making those touch ups as well! Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 15:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the Hebden, North Yorkshire GA review. It was much appreciated.

I have tried to follow your advice, but I am having a little difficulty with the Geography section. The broad description of the topography and land use is not formally described in writing but is easily evident from an inspection of the Ordnance Survey 1:25,000 and Googlemap. Do you think that I ought to formally cite these as sources, and if so, how? --Langcliffe (talk) 16:01, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: Thanks for the updated review. I'm delighted that the article has qualified for GA, but it was a team effort. I'll check those references you have suggested as soon as I get the opportunity. One problem with the area is that the most recent Geology survey dates from 1859! --Langcliffe (talk) 08:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for reviewing. Best regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:16, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Well done for your work during the GAN backlog elimination drive. Peanut4 (talk) 14:09, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Pyrotec, Thanks for setting up the table. I wouldn't have a clue how to start! I guess we need to get Steve (Slambo) to adjust the template. I'm away for a few days, but happy to engage further after that. Bermicourt (talk) 09:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for your work on the table - really, really helpful. Bermicourt (talk) 12:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

W.A.C. Smith and Paul Anderson (March 1995). The Illustrated History of Edinburgh's Railways, Irwell Press, ISBN 1871608597 is not a dictionary but, as its title suggests, an illustrated history. --John (talk) 23:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughtful comments here. Sorry I didn't notice them until now. --John (talk) 07:18, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. You stated "You mention the Granton boat trains, but the significance is greatly underplayed: the link stopped because the Forth Railway Bridge was built, but that's not in the article". At present, the article has "The train ferry service was withdrawn in 1876, but a passenger ferry continued for many years.", and I believe that to be correct. How does that fit in with the FRB opening in 1890? --John (talk) 07:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Much of what is in your article on this subject, i.e. the paragraph about the ferry, appears in

• Ellis, (Cuthbert) Hamilton (1954). British Railway History: An Outline from the Accession of William IV to the Nationalisation of the Railways. Volume 1: 1830-1876. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. OCLC 25208298.:

Vol 1, pp. 180-181, but in more detail. The official inaugural trip had twenty waggons and a first class carriage. It said that the service ran for 50 years until the opening of the Forth Bridge, but not through carriages by ferry.Pyrotec (talk) 18:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

There were two problems, the ferry was fully occupied by goods waggons and passengers could get sea sick inside the confined space of carriages. Family parties were carried in their own private carriages.Pyrotec (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:48, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for picking up this article's GA review so quickly. I was rather afraid it might languish for a while at GAN as being a bit too obscure. I look forward to your comments in due course. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The Williams tube was used in many early computers, including some IBM machines. But surely that information should be in the Williams tube article, not this one? Why pick out one machine that used Williams tubes in an article about the SSEM? I believe that this article more than meets the good article criteria, and that the issues you raised in its review have been at least adequately met. Do you disagree? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou for your comments and help Please note when you have added the page to the Valley Site that the link details are not now correct on the original Rhydymwyn Village page and also the name on the new page.

The Valley site was known as M.S. Factory Valley (Ministry of Supply) NOT H.M.Factory Valley.

Please can you change this. Thankyou

Silverhook (talk) 13:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I notice you've split Blue Lias and Lower Lias. Just wondering what your rationale was, and stuff. Abyssal (talk) 17:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Abyssal (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

First of all, many thanks for assessing this article and awarding it GA status! With regard to where it should be listed, I noticed that FA synagogues have been listed under Religion, mysticism and mythology but for places of worship in Good Articles, the place seems to be Architecture. Regards, Chesdovi (talk) 18:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, just responding to your review and wondered where you found (2001) for Blakemore - or was it just for example? I cannot find the publication anywhere, although there are plenty of his books on Amazon. Parrot of Doom (talk) 15:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. The reference is quoting the website, not the magazine. The same reference was used in the Manchester Bolton & Bury Canal article and was thought reliable enough. Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice one, cheers :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Bridgewater Canal - hooray! :) Now I only have Radcliffe, Greater Manchester to worry about! Parrot of Doom (talk) 20:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Radcliffe, Greater Manchester - blimey, not even any requests! I must be improving :) I reckon this article is the one I'll be pushing for FAC, I have more information to add but its mostly minor holes in the plot, and not gaping continuity errors :) Thanks! Parrot of Doom (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the commentary at Merle Reskin Theatre. I think I have responded to your thoughts.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

...I've occasionally reviewed GACs, and wondered - I just reviewed Longfellow House which I felt was too short - I haven't failed it although upon glancing at the talk page, and noticing the 'start class' in the infobox, perhaps I should. I haven't been able to find information on the length of GA articles. Do you have any tips here? It isn't a bad little article, but needs significant expansion IMO, and there doesn't seem to be much activity on it. Parrot of Doom (talk) 01:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Pyrotec, i'm wondering if you would mind having a little look at the History of Kirkcaldy article (which i created) to see sort of mark it would recieve. thanks. Kilnburn (talk) 21:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

problem was sorted by another user Kilnburn (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Pyrotec, i have recently done a bit of work on Dysart article but i'm wondering what sort of mark it would now recieve (currently the article is at stub-status according to the Scotland portal, but it is now probably at start maybe C status). Kilnburn (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kilburn. Done, I agree, C-class.Pyrotec (talk) 11:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for reviewing the forts of Mumbai. I note that you brought up two issues: the need for a copyedit, and that the articles lacks meat. I agree with the latter. The article does lack meat, but very little is written about these forts. They are not "forts" in the real sense, rather their purpose was to serve as armoured watch towers. I have been researching these forts for six years now, and have regularly scanned articles and books for more information. (Articles have been up since 2005) Unfortunately, other than what I have sourced in the article, nothing else is published. I have also cross-checked with newspapers, and google books, but nothing much is given. I could write on the architecture myself, based on the photographs I have listed, but that would be WP:OR. Any additional publications on the forts might be tucked away in forgotten archives and difficult to access. What do you suggest I do? =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the birthday wishes... (it was on Saturday, the 6th). I looked for some reviews on Fortress Portugal in India but could not find anything substantial. I'm afraid that the author talks more on the forts in Goa, Vasai and Chaul which were strategically important to the Portuguese. Mumbai was never important to the Portuguese, and was always eyed by the British (and for a short time, the Dutch). I'm still thinking about the references and content issue though. The Google books is too sketchy, I'm not sure why Google shows snippet views for books that should be in public domain. I have found possible good source, The Origin of Bombay yy José Gerson da Cunha that I have ordered online. The problem with forts in Mumbai is save two of them, the rest are barely sixty paces in length, so compared to larger forts in India, these a non-notable. If you would like to see the list of all forts, see List of forts in Mumbai. I'll reply later on the referencing issue. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll fix the forts next week. Have a really busy week next week, plus suffering from net outages after the undersea cable was cut the other day. Also wish you a Merry Christmas in advance. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Other than a passing mention, I could not find anything on the forts in the Origins of Bombay (1900) by Jose Gerson Da Cunha. I have not read much of the book though (its not in a chronological format), so I could have perhaps skipped the mention during my read of the era, So what are the next options for the forts? =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for looking into it. I can't find anything else, but I hear there is some research material available on the Forts at the museum ref. BTW, Chaul and Bassein are not in Bombay. I guess I'll give up at this moment because I cannot commit any more time on the fort project. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)