User talk:MJ9674

Thanks for finally getting an RS to the class 769 article! Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 13:14, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no problem! Been trying to find one on and off for a few weeks now and finally a source posted about it! MJ9674 (talk) 13:38, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Maurice Oly. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, British Rail Class 221, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Maurice Oly (talk) 17:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I provided a citation that was used earlier in the article, I don't see what the issue is? I'm not going to revert until we've discussed this so I can understand properly what the issue is exactly but i'm really not sure what the problem is.MJ9674 (talk) 17:15, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The citation you re-used did not back up the changed information, as the source is from before the units entered service with Grand Central and thus could not be used to back up the information you changed. Maurice Oly (talk) 01:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the same citation you're now using in the exact same place I put mine? I'm not objecting to that by the way, the information is accurate and there's no logical reason why it shouldn't be there but it's very odd to be objecting to something you did yourself 2 days ago...

It's also worth noting that the only 2 times this citation is used is stating that the transfer to Grand Central is occurring, if you feel this doesn't work within wikipedia guidelines however i'm sure you can just say they're stored pending entry into service with GC or something. MJ9674 (talk) 10:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The cite I used which you re-used said that the units had been transferred to Grand Central but it did not say they were in service with Grand Central at the time, hence why the edits had to be undone as a source was needed to say the units were in service with Grand Central.
Unless units are in service with an operator they count as stored… Unless they have been scrapped that is.
Anyway article is now up to date and says the units are with Grand Central which is what matters. Maurice Oly (talk) 14:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. MJ9674 (talk) 14:46, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MJ9674, thanks for your edits to British Rail Class 67. Just to let you know I've altered your citations to use DMY dates, as per the template at the top of the page. Please make sure you use the correct date format, and happy editing :-) Danners430 (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks I wasn't aware of that! MJ9674 (talk) 17:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hibaq Jama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hibaq Jama until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pseudoname1 (talk) 00:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]